If Miller Is Off The Project...Who Is YOUR Director?

[thegameq]

It's not like he's shown that he's bad for Justice League either. I mean, you've got to start somewhere to show that your able to make movies like Justice League. And in Miller's case, maybe it acutally is Justice League, that will show us that. Just because there are directors who've already done similar movies dosn't mean a director who hasn't can't be the man who in the end will make the better movie out of the League. Miller is a great director, who made great movies in all diffent kind of generes, which is the first step. Let the man show what he's got to offer...

The problem with what you're saying is Miller will be using a major motion picture with huge expectations and infamous characters as his litmus test.

See Tim Story.....

Frankly, I'm not against Miller since his Mad Max film did have an epic tone of sorts and he is an artist.

 

[Showtime]

Why is this the question? We pretty much all agree that Miller is a talanted director and the fact is that he's the one who's supposed to do this movie. We won't know for sure if he's the right guy for the job or not, till we've seen what he's done. Same thing goes for every other director. It's not like there's someone who already delivered something, that assures us he will make the perfect JLA movie, while Miller won't. I just don't get all the discussions about the need for Miller to be replaced. Like i said before, i think it's just fanboy crap to not be open for someones vision, just becuase there aren't any projects in his past that make me think i can appraise what's this vision is going to be...

I didn't open the thread. That was the question posed in the thread. "If Miller was off the project, Who is YOUR director?" It's actually something to debate, instead of sitting here and staring at threads that say, "I Lovez Teh Millerz!" or "Millerz is teh Sukz!"

I don't think there is anything that will tell us if a good director right for a certain project or not, no matter what he did before. Singer did great comic book movies before Superman, but SR wasn't all that great. So is Miller right for JLA? We don't know! But we know that, no matter what he worked with before, he didn't turn it into crap. So that gives me confidence. Does that make him the best choice for the Justice League? Of course not. But the only thing that would show us who's the best man for that movie would be if we'd have every possible director do a version of it. Ridicouls? Yeah! But so are all this discussions. I mean, it's fine if people are posting their favorite directors for this project and all that, but stuff like "If we want a good movie instead of a big piece of crap, Miller HAS to be replaced by..." IMO just isn't necessary.

So I guess we should just close this thread and all of the other threads in the JL forum, because that is the only thing we can do, is speculate?

 

[Orin]

If i look at the quote, you're referring to, it says "it's fine if people are posting their favorite directors for this project and all that, but stuff like "If we want a good movie instead of a big piece of crap, Miller HAS to be replaced by..." IMO just isn't necessary."
I don't know if it's cause of my englisch, but the way i see it, i was not saying people shouldn't speculate, post their favoirte director/writer/actor choices or whatever. The point i was trying to make is that some people seem to confuse their speculation with facts, or at least post it that way. Maybe it would be better to think rationally about certain things, before i post something like "this should be the director and this should be the cast, then this movie would be good, but with Miller and his crappy choices, it going to fail miserably." I just don't see why this is necessary, when the thread asks for my personal favorite choices and i can just write "If i'd make this movie, i'd pick..." or whatever, which wouldn't be a problem for anyone and which also wouldn't result in this discussions. I mean, if you think Miller isn't the right director for this movie, that's just fine. If you want to suggest someone, who you think would be ideal, that's also fine. But what does it help us to argue about whether or not Miller is the best choice? Who knows, maybe there are directors out there, that would make better Batman movies than Chris Nolan! But it Nolan is the one who's at the top of the Batman franchise. So who cares, as long as he delivers good Bat flicks?

 

[aka Kal el]

I really want to see Ridley Scott make a Superhero movie before he retires

Ridley would be a good choice but my first choice would be Micheal Bay. Bruce Timm to write the script.

 

[Showtime]

If i look at the quote, you're referring to, it says "it's fine if people are posting their favorite directors for this project and all that, but stuff like "If we want a good movie instead of a big piece of crap, Miller HAS to be replaced by..." IMO just isn't necessary."
I don't know if it's cause of my englisch, but the way i see it, i was not saying people shouldn't speculate, post their favoirte director/writer/actor choices or whatever. The point i was trying to make is that some people seem to confuse their speculation with facts, or at least post it that way. Maybe it would be better to think rationally about certain things, before i post something like "this should be the director and this should be the cast, then this movie would be good, but with Miller and his crappy choices, it going to fail miserably." I just don't see why this is necessary, when the thread asks for my personal favorite choices and i can just write "If i'd make this movie, i'd pick..." or whatever, which wouldn't be a problem for anyone and which also wouldn't result in this discussions. I mean, if you think Miller isn't the right director for this movie, that's just fine. If you want to suggest someone, who you think would be ideal, that's also fine. But what does it help us to argue about whether or not Miller is the best choice? Who knows, maybe there are directors out there, that would make better Batman movies than Chris Nolan! But it Nolan is the one who's at the top of the Batman franchise. So who cares, as long as he delivers good Bat flicks?

It is all one in the same, I don't think people should necessarily rip on Miller as being "crappy", I don't remember seeing anybody do that. What you're discussing above is one in the same though what is the difference between saying this:

I mean, if you think Miller isn't the right director for this movie, that's just fine. If you want to suggest someone, who you think would be ideal, that's also fine.

OR THIS​

But what does it help us to argue about whether or not Miller is the best choice?

To me that is two different ways of saying the same thing. If somebody doesn't think Miller is the right director and want to suggest another director as above than they obviously don't think he is the best choice.

I think that is what the forum is all about, debate, as long as it is civil. That is why I am here, to keep it civil. It seems this thread certainly has sparked some good debate in my opinion.​

 

[Orin]

I still think there's a difference between saying we need another director, cause Miller will turn JLA into crap, like it's fact, or just that you think he isn't the right man for man for the job and there are better choices, like it's your personal opinion. But i guess we both know each others points now and this dosn't have to be discussed any further...

 

[Sawyer]

Ridley would be a good choice but my first choice would be Micheal Bay. Bruce Timm to write the script.

A Bruce Timm written, live action JLA film would just make me lose my s***.

 

[The Major]

What does that have to do with the fact, that Nolan, just like Miller with Justice League, wouldn't have been mentioned by anyone for Batman? And did that assure us that Nolan was the right choice as director? Not really, it just made it likely that the writer was the right choice.

Actually Nolan's track record fits Batman perfectly in my eyes. The movies I've seen that he's made before Begins were mystery noir with occasional violence (Momento, Insomnia) which had the vibe which would make sense with Batman, IMO.

The scripts, tone and casting are solid in those films. Another plus.

And it's not like Goyer didn't do crap before.

True.

However, if anything, that argument can be used anaginst the Mulroneys but surley not against Miller.

The Mulroney's definitely have much more to prove then Miller does.

Acutally, i have no idea how much the Mulroneys know about comic books or not. But even if they didn't have any knowledge of the DCU, since they based their script on actual comic book storylines, i guess it's save to say they did their research.

I've read Tower of Babel. That's one of their storylines they're adapting, right?

It was good but definitely not material you want for a character study.

Someone mentioned they are long time comic readers. Hopefully they collected the characters titles (Superman, JLA, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, the Flash etc) and are up to date with them.

You know, it's just that funny liltte fanboy thing to assume only people who did similar stuff before are able to do something good with a comic book franchise. Maybe it has something to do with the fact, that they fear a wrong portrayl of their characters so much.

That fear is there for a reason.

But guys, whatever they do, it won't assure us a good movie.

That's true.

They could let a comic book fan write or direct this movie and it could turn out to be crap, just like a non-comic reader can make something great out of it. In the end, it's just important that you get a good writer/director.

It will mean the people will have a better grasp on the franchise then a cast and crew who barely know the property they're using.

It all comes down to whether the people hired are talented enough and their skills match the franchise they're doing. Same with any other movie or tv show.

Some people, no matter how good they are, aren't suited for certain properties to adapt.

The guy who made Daredevil came close to making a good adaption. He knew all the right things. Problem was he didn't seem to have the skill set for the movie.

Didn't make it dark enough, either.

It wasn't all his fault entirely IIRC. Fox seemed to want to put to many things in the movie. Elektra would have been better suited for a sequel. They didn't seem to have enough faith in the franchise to work as an R which it should ave been from the start. Or at least get as dark as Begins while staying dark enough for a PG. I think it was PG or PG-13, don't remember it being an R.

IMO, Miller is such a director. It's not like he's one of my favorites (that would be guys like Scorsese, Lynch, Fincher, Burton, Cameron, De Palma and so on) but since out of this list, only Cameron would be a good fit for JLA, i have only one candidate.

I'd think Hollywood has more then a few directors who could do JL well.

Guillimero del Toro, Roland Emmerich, Kerry Conran, Peter Jackson, the guy who directed I Robot come to mind.

While i have to judge on every other choice indivdually, by considering the movies that i see from this director. With Miller, there are 7 movies i've seen and non of them were crap, while pretty much all of them had some depth. Yeah, he didn't make a movie like Justice League before, but he did all diffenrent kinds of movies and did well will all of them.

Agreed.

JL is lucky to have Miller on it.

So why should i want someone else doing this? Especially when i don't think any of the guys that are being brought up by the fandom are as overall talanted as Miller.

Which directors have fans bought up that you didn't think were good for JL?

I don't know how Millers movie will turn out, but it's the same thing with however i say should replace him.

No matter who directs it JL will be a huge task.

I hope Miller delivers.

It's to bad his WW film never materialized. I'd have liked to see that.

Maybe once JL is completed he can go after that license again.

You know, sometimes i think fans just want to change things for the sake of changing. For gods sake, let Miller show you what he wants to do with this movie before you wish him to hell. It's not like he's McG or anything...

Thats very true.

Since he's talking about the Justice League being related to the greek gods, something that Morrison did like 10 years ago, i guess you can say that he's at least as up to date as that. And that surely dosn't come from someone who only knows these characters from superfriends...

Agreed.

I'd like to hear where Miller heard about Morrison's JLA and what he thought of it if he's read it.

Loud Silent Man:

Just keep Bay and Ratner away from it.

 

[Orin]

I'd think Hollywood has more then a few directors who could do JL well.

Sure, but since i think they've got a director who could do JL well, that isn't really relevant to me right now.

Which directors have fans bought up that you didn't think were good for JL?

Well, there are a few, but what i meant was that i haven't seen a suggestion so far, that made me think "Yeah, that guy needs to replace Miller, cause he's definitifly gonna deliver a better movie" or anything.

As for the rest, seems pretty reasonable and i don't feel any need to add anything, which is actually pretty refreshing...

 

[The Major]

Sure, but since i think they've got a director who could do JL well, that isn't really relevant to me right now.

Agreed.

Well, there are a few, but what i meant was that i haven't seen a suggestion so far, that made me think "Yeah, that guy needs to replace Miller, cause he's definitifly gonna deliver a better movie" or anything.

Okay.

As for the rest, seems pretty reasonable and i don't feel any need to add anything, which is actually pretty refreshing...

Cool.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

The Major:

The director of I, Robot is Alex Proyas. He also did The Crow and Dark City.

He's an Aussie. t:

 

[The Major]

The Major:

The director of I, Robot is Alex Proyas. He also did The Crow and Dark City.

He's an Aussie. t:

If Proyas can't or isn't interested in JL (after Miller) WB should try to hire him for Batman once Nolan is finished.

Or any super-hero DC franchise really. He'd make a cool Birds of Prey or Flash.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

^ They should get him for Teen Titans.

 

[The Guard]

Actually Nolan's track record fits Batman perfectly in my eyes. The movies I've seen that he's made before Begins were mystery noir with occasional violence (Momento, Insomnia) which had the vibe which would make sense with Batman, IMO.

And then he made a massive action movie. Go figure.

 

[sad lieutenant]

Miller is certainly capable, but during all of this pre-production hullabaloo, you'd think that he'd have enough sense to give the fans a nod, throw them a bone -- anything -- to drum up some interest in this project. Rather, we have a ridiculous-looking cast that seemed aimed at the Hanna Montana set, and a hodge-podge of conflicting story details (with one exception: the Flash is dead at the beginning of the fawking film. Gee, thanks.)... Whereas Nolan's involvement and "vision" with respect to Batman Begins was interesting enough to get fans on board pretty early (not all, mind you!), Miller's "vision" -- as far as we know -- is keen upon establishing a cash-cow franchise (hence skewing young: so that we see the heroes grow up over the years, according to the director himself), kind of belligerent, and just not very exciting at all. Plus, we got a whack-as-hell title and virtually no input from the talented people that have breathed life into the JLA in print, TV, and video. Doesn't Miller know that it's cool now to actually respect the source material and make use of all available talent when adapting a comic book movie? Or did he see what Bryan Singer did with Superman and decide to up the ante viz a vie fan disappointment?

These things tend to get more interesting when a youngish director with some sort of indie cred and/or geek pedigree gets involved. Not the director of Happy Feet (Mad Max was a long long long fawking time ago, people); not a script from Dermot Mulrooney's siblings whose only writing credit is for something called "Sunny and Share Love You." Is anyone STILL BAFFLED as to why this project fawking sucks? Let it go down. Please.*

That said, a potential JLA film is so sullied by the poor decisions associated with this project, that I cannot think of a director who would be a good fit. I wouldn't want to wish this JLA on anybody. Warners should invite a director who can bring something interesting to the project, a la the Nolans, the Snyders, etc. Stay clear of the Ratners and Bays and that guy with three names who butchered Ghost Rider and Daredevil. Fans were OK with Michael Bay on Transformers because they really just wanted something Big And Dumb from a Transformers movie. (Which, I would argue, was received as a live-action adaptation of a cartoon, not a comic book) If you make Transformers: Big And Dumb, you are not taking a whiskey-schitt on fans' fond memories of so many cartoons, toys, comics, and lunch boxes. This, however, is not the case with coveted comic properties. This is where Big And Dumb doesn't play well anymore (did it ever?). I don't know why. Comic films must have some sort of fidelity to a dizzying "universe" of source material, must be nuanced, and must satisfy on the visceral level of kick-assery (which is why Watchmen will succeed -- and may, in the estimation of prop designer Jimmy Chow, prove to be the Blade Runner of the early 21st century). If not, then your comic film is fawked.


*If not, then please end up as the Heaven's Gate of comic films. Which could very well happen to this thing, especially post-Watchmen.

 

[The Major]

And then he made a massive action movie. Go figure.

An action movie with all of those elements heavy influencing it.

Sad Lieutenent:

Fans were OK with Michael Bay on Transformers because they really just wanted something Big And Dumb from a Transformers movie.

The fans hated Bays TF.

It was the little kids and people who barely knew much about or cared about the property who enjoyed it.

Bay even lowered expectations for months before it hit the screens, too. When the bar lowers people won't judge something as harshly. I'm sure the studio was counting on it.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

The fans hated Bays TF.

It was the little kids and people who barely knew much about or cared about the property who enjoyed it.

Yeah, we all hated it.

 

[The Major]

You're generalising. Not all the fans hated it.

Wouldn't you be in the minority of fans who liked it?

Only the ones who take things too damn seriously.

It's to bad Bay didn't take TF half as seriously as they do. The movie would have been superior to what he made IMO.

Stop talking s**t.

If you liked it more power to you.

 

[cerealkiller182]

Dude its cars that turn into robots. How serious does it have to be?

 

[Jake Cassidy]

Dude its cars that turn into robots. How serious does it have to be?

Exactly.

Now, back on topic. Major, who is Kerry Conran?

 

[The Major]

Dude its cars that turn into robots. How serious does it have to be?

You could use the same argument with any super-hero adaption.

On the surface there may not be much to take seriously but given the right people in control of the adaption will depend on how well the final product will be.

Batman is just a rich psycho who dresses up as a bat to beat the crap out of people after his parents got murdered. Nolan was able to give us Batman Begins based on that premise. There's no reason Hollywood couldn't have some a similar route, in quality, with TF.

Jake:

Writer and director of Sky Captain And The World of Tomorrow.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0346156/

 

[cerealkiller182]

Kerry Coran= director of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow

I wasnt a big fan of the movie but I love that pulp style and it was well put together from a technical standpoint so I would consider him a capable director.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

Thanks Major & Killer. I didn't really like Sky Captain, but visually it's amazing.

 

[KELLEL]

Guys, I just hope JLA isn't 90 minutes. it seems like every movie Miller does has a runtime of ninety minutes....JLA needs to be 2 hours and 10-15 minutes, that'd be fair, IMO.

 

[Webhead2006]

Oh god yea if it is 90mins that is way to short for 7 heroes and all that. That was one thing i hated about FF2 time. What i hope for is between 2hrs(min)- 2hr 30mins(max) runtime.