Paramount announces official Green Hornet reboot in the works

sweetre15

Positive Page
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
8,212
Reaction score
15
Points
33
What director Gavin O Connor had to say about the character and his vision for it:

“I’ve been wanting to make this movie — and create this franchise — since I’ve wanted to make movies,” O’Connor said. “As a kid, when most of my friends were into Superman and Batman, there was only one superhero who held my interest — The Green Hornet. I always thought he was the baddest badass because he had no superpowers. The Green Hornet was a human superhero. And he didn’t wear a clown costume. And he was a criminal — in the eyes of the law — and in the eyes of the criminal world. So all this felt real to me. Imagine climbing to the top of the Himalayas, or Mount Everest, or K2 over and over again and no one ever knew? You can never tell anybody. That’s the life of Britt and Kato. What they do, they can never say. They don’t take credit for anything.”

O’Connor waited until the time was right for his shot.

“For almost 20 years now I’ve been tracking the rights, watching from the sidelines as they were optioned by one studio or another,” he said. “When I discovered the rights were available again, I tracked them down, partnered with Peter Chernin and we set the movie up at Paramount. With the rights now in our loving hands, I’m beyond excited to bring The Green Hornet into the 21st century in a meaningful and relevant way; modernizing it and making it accessible to a whole new generation. My intention is to bring a gravitas to The Green Hornet that wipes away the camp and kitsch of the previous iteration. I want to re-mythologize The Green Hornet in a contemporary context, with an emphasis on story and character, while at the same time, incorporating themes that speak to my heart. The comic book movie is the genre of our time. How do we look at it differently? How do we create a distinctive film experience that tells itself differently than other comic book movies? How do we land comfortably at the divide between art and industry? How do we go deeper, prompt more emotion? How do we put a beating heart into the character that was never done before? These are my concerns…these are my desires, my intentions, my fears, my goals.”

The exercise will involve bringing The Green Hornet into the kind of existential struggles evident in some Marvel and DC Comics franchises based on solitary, misunderstood anti-heroes.

“The Green Hornet is ultimately a film about self-discovery,” O’Connor said. “When we meet Britt Reid he’s lost faith in the system. Lost faith in service. In institutions. If that’s the way the world works, that’s what the world’s going to get. He’s a man at war with himself. A secret war of self that’s connected to the absence of his father. It’s the dragon that’s lived with him that he needs to slay. And the journey he goes on to become The Green Hornet is the dramatization of it, and becomes Britt’s true self. I think of this film as Batman upside down meets Bourne inside out by way of Chris Kyle [American Sniper]. He’s the anti-Bruce Wayne. His struggle: Is he a savior or a destroyer? Britt made money doing bad things, but moving forward he’s making no money doing good things. He must realize his destiny as a protector and force of justice by becoming the last thing he thought he’d ever become: his father’s son. Which makes him a modern Hamlet. By uncovering his past, and the truth of his father, Britt unlocks the future.”


O’Connor said the character has the requisite physical skills to qualify as a badass:

“Britt’s shadow war background makes him a natural at undercover work. This is connected to his military backstory, which is more CIA Special Activities Division than SEAL Team 6. He’s cross-trained in intelligence work and kinetic operations. A hunter at the top of the Special Operations food chain, working so far outside the system he had to think twice to remember his real name. We will put a vigilante engine under the hood of his character,”


Source: http://deadline.com/2016/11/the-gre...t-chernin-entertainment-bruce-lee-1201854807/

I'm Really hoping this delivers the goods because as a fan of the character, I can't wait till the stench of the Rogen movie is washed away. Not to mention, he's tailor made for live action and doesn't require a huge budget to be done Justice.

I'd like to think Philip Ng would be the most logical choice for Kato at the moment due to playing Bruce Lee in a recent biopic along with having good English speaking skills and the necessary martial arts abilities for it.
 
Last edited:
It will not be as disappointing as the Seth Rogen one.
I have to admit, Jay Chou and Christoph Waltz were great casting choices, and delivered on their ends.
 
It will not be as disappointing as the Seth Rogen one.
I have to admit, Jay Chou and Christoph Waltz were great casting choices, and delivered on their ends.

With that said, I'm really curious on how they approach Britt becoming a Newspaper publisher with his military background and all that in this film. I suppose he can decide to take up his father's mantle at the Daily Sentinel after returning from his time in the military. It's just weird having to wonder how it'll all fit within this narrative.
 
Please, a good one.
It will possibly be like Dredd, a good movie grossing less than its production cost.
 
I just don't know why you would do another Green Hornet movie after the last one. To me, Green Hornet is NOT the character you make as the post-modern comic book superhero movie.

Do you guys know what the current best post-modern deconstructionist take on the modern superhero stuff is? It's One-Punch Man.

Green Hornet is sort of a product of a bygone era, like Lone Ranger. He originated as a masked crime fighter radio serial show. Now yeah, he can easily evolve with the times. But Green Hornet was never like this deconstruction of masked crimefighter shows.

I think Seth Rogen attempted his version to be a type of parody/half-straight buddy action movie type of thing, but it didn't really work. Like that scene where he says "We'll be crimefighters but we'll avoid all the problems of being crimefighters by pretending to be bad guys!" That was the angle with the Green Hornet. They posed as bad guys to easily navigate the criminal underworld, but in the Rogen version the way he framed it sounded silly. Like that was the key to solving all the problems of being a superhero, pretend to be bad guys. Well no, that's not how it works. And then they basically had it so it was Kato who was the real brains of the operation and the one doing all the actual work.

I think what I remember the most about Rogen's Green Hornet, was that it was never really funny. None of the jokes IMHO landed. I don't think they got a really good actor for Kato. I think more than anything, I was just not into Rogen as Britt Reid either.

The 3D conversion was terrible. I think the only part I genuinely liked was the closing credit sequence with the CG animated logo and the music from the classic TV series.

I don't know if this is possible. But I think what's far more profound about Green Hornet, is that he's basically the Batman prototype. Think about it. The Green Hornet radio serials actually predate the creation of Batman by a few years. Green Hornet sort of set the stage with a wealthy elite type of dude actually masquerading at night as a costumed crimefighter with a sweet ride. It did that BEFORE Batman did.

Also, the Green Hornet TV series actually had a crossover with the Adam West 1960s Batman TV series. Think about that. In the 1960s, you had two superhero TV shows crossing over. It's all the rage right now, but Green Hornet and Batman did it earlier way back in the mid-1960s.

Now I'm not sure if there is an angle there that works as a movie, that Green Hornet is basically the Batman prototype. Like Gavin O'Connor calls him the anti-Bruce Wayne. Well no he's really not. You could argue that it was characters like Britt Reid and Green Hornet that directly inspired characters such as Bruce Wayne and Batman to happen.
 
I just don't know why you would do another Green Hornet movie after the last one. To me, Green Hornet is NOT the character you make as the post-modern comic book superhero movie.

Do you guys know what the current best post-modern deconstructionist take on the modern superhero stuff is? It's One-Punch Man.

Green Hornet is sort of a product of a bygone era, like Lone Ranger. He originated as a masked crime fighter radio serial show. Now yeah, he can easily evolve with the times. But Green Hornet was never like this deconstruction of masked crimefighter shows.

I think Seth Rogen attempted his version to be a type of parody/half-straight buddy action movie type of thing, but it didn't really work. Like that scene where he says "We'll be crimefighters but we'll avoid all the problems of being crimefighters by pretending to be bad guys!" That was the angle with the Green Hornet. They posed as bad guys to easily navigate the criminal underworld, but in the Rogen version the way he framed it sounded silly. Like that was the key to solving all the problems of being a superhero, pretend to be bad guys. Well no, that's not how it works. And then they basically had it so it was Kato who was the real brains of the operation and the one doing all the actual work.

I think what I remember the most about Rogen's Green Hornet, was that it was never really funny. None of the jokes IMHO landed. I don't think they got a really good actor for Kato. I think more than anything, I was just not into Rogen as Britt Reid either.

The 3D conversion was terrible. I think the only part I genuinely liked was the closing credit sequence with the CG animated logo and the music from the classic TV series.

I don't know if this is possible. But I think what's far more profound about Green Hornet, is that he's basically the Batman prototype. Think about it. The Green Hornet radio serials actually predate the creation of Batman by a few years. Green Hornet sort of set the stage with a wealthy elite type of dude actually masquerading at night as a costumed crimefighter with a sweet ride. It did that BEFORE Batman did.

Also, the Green Hornet TV series actually had a crossover with the Adam West 1960s Batman TV series. Think about that. In the 1960s, you had two superhero TV shows crossing over. It's all the rage right now, but Green Hornet and Batman did it earlier way back in the mid-1960s.

Now I'm not sure if there is an angle there that works as a movie, that Green Hornet is basically the Batman prototype. Like Gavin O'Connor calls him the anti-Bruce Wayne. Well no he's really not. You could argue that it was characters like Britt Reid and Green Hornet that directly inspired characters such as Bruce Wayne and Batman to happen.

You can argue that he's the "anti-Batman" in his modern form due to the fact that during the day he's a very classy, reputable newspaper publisher by day where as his crimefighting persona is often villainized (intentionally) due to the fact that he masquerades as a criminal and pretends to make deals with them to throw off their suspicion while blaming everything (I use that terms fairly loosely) on the Green Hornet. Where as Bruce Wayne while also a rich billionaire often built his image as more of a playboy in the public that doesn't always have the best reputation in comparison to his father but has a vigilante persona that fights crime openly and isn't largely seen as a villain by the public outside of people who don't like the idea of taking the law into one's own hands. Not only that Hornet's gadgets and vehicle aren't extremely enhanced outside of having a big gun on the hood of the Black Beauty.

In a way Hornet is in a way the vigilante archetype but Bruce tends to have more in common with Zorro and Sherlock Holmes than he does Britt Reid/Hornet.

Now in terms of whether A GH movie could work in this era, to me....If you can easily modernize and keep people interested in characters like James Bond and Sherlock Holmes after all these years then I don't see why the same can't potentially be done for Hornet in the right hands.
 
You can argue that he's the "anti-Batman" in his modern form due to the fact that during the day he's a very classy, reputable newspaper publisher by day where as his crimefighting persona is often villainized (intentionally) due to the fact that he masquerades as a criminal and pretends to make deals with them to throw off their suspicion while blaming everything (I use that terms fairly loosely) on the Green Hornet. Where as Bruce Wayne while also a rich billionaire often built his image as more of a playboy in the public that doesn't always have the best reputation in comparison to his father but has a vigilante persona that fights crime openly and isn't largely seen as a villain by the public outside of people who don't like the idea of taking the law into one's own hands. Not only that Hornet's gadgets and vehicle aren't extremely enhanced outside of having a big gun on the hood of the Black Beauty.

To me, what you described isn't really an anti-Batman at all. They have more similarities in all those factors than they do differences. Other than Green Hornet is seen by the public as a criminal and not a crime-fighter, which he actually is. And there's been plenty of times that's been the case as well for Batman. So it's not exactly some profound change.

Now in terms of whether A GH movie could work in this era, to me....If you can easily modernize and keep people interested in characters like James Bond and Sherlock Holmes after all these years then I don't see why the same can't potentially be done for Hornet in the right hands.

It's not always so easy though. And it's not always successful. Sherlock Holmes books are classic literature, and they've been adapted over and over again for decades now in film and TV.

Is Hollywood so desperate for IP at this point and so afraid of original material that they are actually going to attempt another big budget reboot of Green Hornet after that last disaster?
 
To me, what you described isn't really an anti-Batman at all. They have more similarities in all those factors than they do differences. Other than Green Hornet is seen by the public as a criminal and not a crime-fighter, which he actually is. And there's been plenty of times that's been the case as well for Batman. So it's not exactly some profound change.



It's not always so easy though. And it's not always successful. Sherlock Holmes books are classic literature, and they've been adapted over and over again for decades now in film and TV.

Is Hollywood so desperate for IP at this point and so afraid of original material that they are actually going to attempt another big budget reboot of Green Hornet after that last disaster?

Well truth be told we don't even know what the budget of this film would be. I mean considering how real world based GH is with no supernatural elements and nothing particularly high tech about his weaponry along with his costume being a suit with a fedora hat and a face mask, they could easily make this in the 30-60 mill budget range and get good financial returns provided the film delivered the goods enough to give it theatrical staying power.

In regards to this whole thing of "original" ideas in Hollywood, I'm honestly trying to struggle to think back to when Hollywood being original was ever the "rule"....Was in the early days of Hollywood when most of their films were adaptations of stage plays and hard boiled detective novels? Or sometime after that in between comic book adaptation attempts, novel adaptations, fairy tale adaptations and the like regardless of whether it was heavily based on or "loosely inspired by?"

I get the "oversaturation" thing from some who are tired of seeing similar type works on the big screen to an extent but I feel it's largely a case of Rose tinted Nostalgia glasses being worn due to every generation complaining about the next.

So when people ask about "IP desperation" from a studio, I tend to chuckle because simply put "when were they never not desperate for IPs? Lol
 
Well truth be told we don't even know what the budget of this film would be. I mean considering how real world based GH is with no supernatural elements and nothing particularly high tech about his weaponry along with his costume being a suit with a fedora hat and a face mask, they could easily make this in the 30-60 mill budget range and get good financial returns provided the film delivered the goods enough to give it theatrical staying power.

In regards to this whole thing of "original" ideas in Hollywood, I'm honestly trying to struggle to think back to when Hollywood being original was ever the "rule"....Was in the early days of Hollywood when most of their films were adaptations of stage plays and hard boiled detective novels? Or sometime after that in between comic book adaptation attempts, novel adaptations, fairy tale adaptations and the like regardless of whether it was heavily based on or "loosely inspired by?"

I get the "oversaturation" thing from some who are tired of seeing similar type works on the big screen to an extent but I feel it's largely a case of Rose tinted Nostalgia glasses being worn due to every generation complaining about the next.

So when people ask about "IP desperation" from a studio, I tend to chuckle because simply put "when were they never not desperate for IPs? Lol
Maybe it was never the rule, but if you look at a lot of what's getting released now, it's a lot of stuff trying to capture the glory of older more successful projects that were fairly new and original in the 70s, 80s and 90s.
 
This director handling a super hero character is all that it take to get me both interested AND optimistic about the final product.

That said... I have always had my own ideas about how a "re-boot/re-make" of GH and Kato should be, and to my mind it works FAR better as a TV/Cable/Streaming program.

Again though... This director has my attention.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"