For all the people who think Fox is anti-Christ:

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Sony already has a release date set for "Green Lantern"... production of that movie hasn't even begun yet...

So everyone who thinks that Fox is the anti-Christ, while Sony is some kind of savior of movies, looks like they are doing the same **** that Fox did with setting a release date before work even begins on the movie...

 

[Matt.S99]

so??big deal,plus it could just be an idea for when they will most likely release the movies
but lets look at it this way
why is sony better than fox?
1)they actually spend time on their superhero movies
2)theyre all good
3)they're probably one of the only companies who can make a good poster
4)they actually care about the fans enough to please them

 

[X-Maniac]

What superhero movies has Sony been responsible for? I know about Spider-Man (i thought the first Spidey movie was crap) and that's about it.

 

[Hunter Rider]

It's the Green Hornet not Green Lantern and what is this date ?

 

[Matt.S99]

What superhero movies has Sony been responsible for? I know about Spider-Man (i thought the first Spidey movie was crap) and that's about it.

so they're still better,fox screwed up both x-men and the hulk

 

[The Batman]

Sony already has a release date set for "Green Lantern"... production of that movie hasn't even begun yet...

So everyone who thinks that Fox is the anti-Christ, while Sony is some kind of savior of movies, looks like they are doing the same **** that Fox did with setting a release date before work even begins on the movie...

uh, yeah...you gotta try harder than that....

 

[X-Maniac]

so they're still better,fox screwed up both x-men and the hulk

The problem here is a lot to do with adapting superhero movies successfully.

People put in charge of creating a film/book/playcartoon/TV show based on a comicbook will make changes, because they have their own vision and ideas, and because some things don't seem to work that well when changed to another medium.

Do you ignore the comics and tell a good story, which involves changing the characters to fit your story? Do you follow the comics closely? What changes do you make? When does a change to a character or classic story wreck that character or story? It's all subjective. There have been people tearing their hair out over Juggernaut being a mutant in X3. Others had nervous breakdowns over Multiple Man being a villain, which only revealed their ignorance as he began as a villain in the comics...

 

[Theweepeople]

so they're still better,fox screwed up both x-men and the hulk

Don't forget how Fox also screwed up Aliens 3/4, Predator 2, Aliens vs. Predator, Daredevil, League of Extraodinary Gentlemen, and Elektra.

 

[Matt.S99]

i actually liked daredevil,but yeah,i agree with the others

 

[flavio_lebeau]

Nell I can't believe you created this thread. lol.

 

[Theweepeople]

Nell I can't believe you created this thread. lol.

I don't understand the point of this thread. Why should I be angry at a movie company that decided to make a movie about a comic book character I don't care about. I'm not angry at Universal making a film about one of the stupidest Marvel characters(Howard the Duck).

 

[flavio_lebeau]

I don't understand the point of this thread. Why should I be angry at a movie company that decided to make a movie about a comic book character I don't care about. I'm not angry at Universal making a film about one of the stupidest Marvel characters(Howard the Duck).

And what does FOX has to do with Sony? Sony being a bad company doesn't automatically make FOX any better. It's like saying your son is a genius when he got 2/10 on a test because someone on his class got 0/10.

 

[danoyse]

Well...Paramount has a release date for Indiana Jones 4 and they don't start filming until June.

Sony announced a release date for Spiderman 3 before Spiderman 2 opened (or a Spiderman 3 had even been written) and so far that looks great.

WB announced the release date for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince while they were still filming Order of the Phoenix.

Green Lantern is for 2009...it doesn't sound all that outrageous to me.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

And what does FOX has to do with Sony? Sony being a bad company doesn't automatically make FOX any better. It's like saying your son is a genius when he got 2/10 on a test because someone on his class got 0/10.

The reason why is because people think Fox is some horrible corporate entity for setting a release date for X-Men The Last Stand before they had directors set, and such, and constantly praise Sony as being this super savior of movies, yet here they are doing the exact same thing that Fox did.

And Fox didn't do Hulk, that was Universal.

 

[Rac]

so they're still better,fox screwed up both x-men and the hulk

Don't forget how Fox also screwed up Aliens 3/4, Predator 2, Aliens vs. Predator, Daredevil, League of Extraodinary Gentlemen, and Elektra.

Don't forget Planet of the Apes (2001), I, Robot, Kingdom of Heaven TC etc. Several good tv-series they've cancelled; Firefly, FreakyLinks, John Doe etc.

What movies/tv-series Sony has screwed? There's gotta be some but I don't think in such large amount as Fox has.

 

[Fried Gold]

so they're still better,fox screwed up both x-men and the hulk

HULK was Universal.

 

[Matt.S99]

oh,crap i thought it was fox lol,well scrach that one,yeah i liked planet of the apes but theirs sucked!

 

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

The reason why is because people think Fox is some horrible corporate entity for setting a release date for X-Men The Last Stand before they had directors set, and such, and constantly praise Sony as being this super savior of movies, yet here they are doing the exact same thing that Fox did.

But the thing is Sony still has the benefit of the doubt. t:

Yes, even though they have the godawful Ghost Rider - hungh - under their belts. They just haven't f***d up nearly as many adaptations yet. t:

 

[La_She-Beast]

Nell I can't believe you created this thread. lol.

Neither do I. Seriously thought you were smart Nell.
You said it yourself:

Get over it already.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

The reason why is because people think Fox is some horrible corporate entity for setting a release date for X-Men The Last Stand before they had directors set, and such, and constantly praise Sony as being this super savior of movies, yet here they are doing the exact same thing that Fox did.

And Fox didn't do Hulk, that was Universal.

Name one person who cares about The Green Lantern enough to be pissed off about it. I can tell you right now that growing up I hated him, couldn't stand him, and found him to be the most blandest superhero of them all(IMO).

Growing up I was more into Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, X-Men, Hulk, Punisher, Daredevil, Ghost Rider, Captain America, Wonder Woman, and so forth. So the fact that Sony is "rushing" a movie of a hero I could careless about is nothing for me to get upset about.

Nice try though Nell.

 

[CapBeerCino]

The reason why is because people think Fox is some horrible corporate entity for setting a release date for X-Men The Last Stand

Yeah, that's why.
It has nothing to do with Fox losing Singer, with Fox CEO messing with the script, with Fox cutting the budget and changing release dates for the first two movies... It seems to me you want to love TLS so much it blinds you.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Yeah, that's why.
It has nothing to do with Fox losing Singer, with Fox CEO messing with the script, with Fox cutting the budget and changing release dates for the first two movies... It seems to me you want to love TLS so much it blinds you.

I don't know if it's so much that, but he does seem intent on converting people and throwing out veiled insults in the process. But really what was the point of this thread?

How can anyone compare The Green Lantern to X-Men? It really makes no sense to me. But that's just how I look at the situation at hand.

 

[Hugh'sMrs]

Yes, studios decide on approximate release timetables. That's not unusual. They have to pick a general target zone when they're scheduling their upcoming slate. But I wouldn't consider, for example, sometime in 2009 specific enough to call it a release date.

Fox didn't commit to a production start for X3 until Superman Returns was underway, then they chose their release date after SR's was announced. Important decisions were based on what Bryan was doing with SR and therein lies the issue.

 

[flavio_lebeau]

Fox didn't commit to a production start for X3 until Superman Returns was underway, then they chose their release date after SR's was announced. Important decisions were based on what Bryan was doing with SR and therein lies the issue.

What I don't understand is how can a multimillionaire, successful movie company like FOX still rely on such stupid, childish revenge acts like those. It's like they get blinded and act personally on everything. I thought companies had to work like professionals instead of ranting amateurs. If that trends goes on and they don't start to work with professionalism, things won't get better for Fox, I fear.

 

[Theweepeople]

Yeah, that's why.
It has nothing to do with Fox losing Singer, with Fox CEO messing with the script, with Fox cutting the budget and changing release dates for the first two movies... It seems to me you want to love TLS so much it blinds you.

It also has nothing to do with Fox hiring hack writers(Kinberg and Penn), considering a hack director(Rob Bowman(Elektra)), passing on the opportunity to hire a director that writes X-Men comcis(Joss Whedon), hiring a director not familiar with the X-Men comics(Matthew Vaughn), publicly lying about changes made to the script, hiring a hack director(The Rat) after Vaughn left, falsely advertising this film(Angel and Cycops in uniform), Rothman comparing X3 to Return of the King, and paying someone off to lie about many spoilers in this movie(http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/articles/2306.asp). There's plenty more I could add to this list but I must admit that after considering all these blunders and lies that Fox is responsible for I shouldn't think they did a bad job of developing X3.