Safe Haven for Those Who Demand More

[Everyman]

What about your idea of a Fantastic Four movie? The one we got was terrible, and very ill-conceived from the get go. It could have been great...

 

[Herr Logan]

What about your idea of a Fantastic Four movie? The one we got was terrible, and very ill-conceived from the get go. It could have been great...

Have you by any chance read the few ideas I posted much, much, much earlier in this thread?
In any case I'll try to dig those up (which will take a while because the Hype's search feature is severely flawed nowadays) and see if any new ideas come to mind.

In the meantime, got any ideas you want to share?

 

[Herr Logan]

In other news:

Zaphod, Cullen, where's the love you promised me?

 

[Zaphod]

In other news:

Zaphod, Cullen, where's the love you promised me?

Well, there is something I want to ask you regarding the orgin:

Would you accept the scenes of Bruce learning how to weild bola and boomerang to be part of a brief, montage flashback? I've currently got the origin down to 50 minutes, and that includes quick scenes of Bruce learning savate from a master living as a beach bum, and the 'way of human passage' in Africa, but I dont know how you feel about making the scenes of Bruce learning his throwing weapons just as brief? Let me know your thoughts.

Oh, and quick question, what do you think of Favereau directing 'Iron-Man'?

 

[Herr Logan]

Well, there is something I want to ask you regarding the orgin:

Would you accept the scenes of Bruce learning how to weild bola and boomerang to be part of a brief, montage flashback? I've currently got the origin down to 50 minutes, and that includes quick scenes of Bruce learning savate from a master living as a beach bum, and the 'way of human passage' in Africa, but I dont know how you feel about making the scenes of Bruce learning his throwing weapons just as brief? Let me know your thoughts.

Yeah, I'm fine with the bola and boomerang scenes being brief.

I'd like the boomerang one to be at least two or three shots, though (a "shot" is what is filmed from when you start recording to when you stop recording, meaning it can be literally any length of time).
First I want to see Bruce throwing a boomerang as a novice thrower and have it fly back at his head, not his hand, and he has to dive out of the way (quick laugh from the audience; establishes that it's not something you can master in few minutes). Then have him do a proper throw that's nothing all that special. Then have him do a really great throw that takes out several targets and/or birds, or whatever he's using to test himself when he's gotten good at it.
This wouldn't even have to take more than a minute.

I don't have anything specific in mind for a bola-training scene, but I'd like the Batman to state, either through monologue exposition or in dialogue with Alfred, that traditional bolas are very dangerous and will often/usually break bones in the animals being snagged in them. The Batman's bolas are specially made to be not only Less Than Lethal-- heretofore referred to as LTL-- (in case it hits someone in the head), but made of the same resin/polymer material as certain police batons; the kind of batons that themselves break under less force than it takes to break bones with them. It's important to make it perfectly clear that the Batman is very careful with the weapons and force he uses against other people, and he doesn't want to hurt anyone by accident. If he wants someone hurt badly, he'll hurt someone badly, and he'll probably do it with a batarang or his own armored body. The Batman in action and during interrogations should come off as savagely and viciously violent, but most of that is for show (in the story, I mean) and he controls the force he applies at all times.

Oh, and quick question, what do you think of Favereau directing 'Iron-Man'?

As in Jon Favereau from 'Swingers,' 'Made,' and 'Dardevil'?

Is this from news reports or a hypothetical question?

I don't know, honestly. I think whoever is directing this movie is a lowlife plebeian if they dare use the suggested idea of making Tony Stark's father the main villain, or even just give the father a large focus in the movie.

I am not very familiar with Iron Man, at least compared to how familiar I am with the X-Men, Spider-Man and even Batman comics, but I know enough to know that such a plot device is completely inconsistent with the comics and also a straight rip-off of 'Hulk.' I mean, in a Hulk movie, Banner's father should definitely have a big focus on the impact he left on Bruce's life, but he shouldn't be alive in present day and shouldn't be the present-day villain. These people disgust me!

So, yeah, that's all I have to say about that for right now.

 

[Zev]

A quick, brutal street fight in plainclothes resulting in police intervention and at least one gunshot wound for Bruce.

I could see this as Bruce picking a fight with one thug and then quickly finding himself outnumbered and outgunned (literally) when other, unrelated lowlifes join in the fight on the side of the inital thug. Perhaps have him realize he needs allies (as in Gordon, not Robin... yet, at least) here.

A debut night for the Batman where he uses similar scare tactics to those of the dock scene in 'Batman Begins' along with the badass intimidation of the beginning of 'BATMAN' and some good old-fashioned, ground-level ass-kicking (and you would actually see everything that goes on, unlike in 'Batman Begins'... none of this "seeing from the criminals' point of view, right in the middle of the action bull$hit; the viewers came to see a Batman fighting in style, not transparent excuses for sloppy cinematic decisions). Swooping around, scaring several (2-4) perpetrators of a street robbery at night (either intervening while it's in progress or catching up to them directly afterwards), beating them up while appearing to be struck by bullets unharmed (the ol' spread the cape and keep the body between the shots trick) and then giving a rehash of the end of that first rooftop scene in 'BATMAN,' except with the lines from an earlier draft of the screenplay:
"You're trespassing, dirtbag."
"Trespassing? You don't own the night!"
"Tell your friends. Tell all your friends... I am the night."

Okay, seems like you have the basic concept of this fight pretty well thought-out.

A big-ass shootout fight with the Penguin (although Oswald will be the only one doing the actual shooting) and his assorted deadly umbrellas, culminating in lots of deadly attack birds being released from cages to chase the Batman off.

This I could see as Batman getting his own game turned against him. He uses strategy and knowledge of the environment against his prey, Oswald knows the environment and so has a homefield advantage on Batman. Think of it happening in a giant room full of bird cages, with the conclusion of Penguin releasing all the birds and them immediately attacking Batman. Possibly the birds are trained to give away Batman's position (canaries sing when he gets near them, owls hoot, etc.). Establish this in an earlier scene where it's more innocuous, like Penguin walking through the birdhouse and being serenaded by the soudns of the birds he approaches.

The scenes from 'Year One' where Flass and a bunch of other dirt cops give Gordon what amounts to a "blanket party" (I know you watch the 'Shield'), but in such a way that he doesn't need to go to the hospital, and also the one where Gordon does the same to Flass, but all by himself.

These are self-explanatory, but important as a change of pace from the smooth, martial arts of Batman's fights.

Raids on mobsters and dirty cops alike, in a similar fashion to the Bat-debut scene but more intense. Martial arts, smoke grenades, illusory tactics making the Batman come off looking invulnerable... the whole shebang.

I could see this again being important for the reversal. Batman is in control of the environments, using lots of tools. Then...

The big GCPD vs. Batman fight in 'Year One,' with the flaming and collapsing building and the summoned swarms of bats.

He has all his tools stripped away and has to improvise. I could see Batman getting really torn up here and pressing on. As a twist, maybe Batman has to race upstairs to evade the rising flames. Climaxes with him getting to the roof, cornered by police helicopters, then summoning the bats and deploying his cape as glider wings to make his escape. Also, it'd be kinda cool if he risked getting caught to pull one of the corrupt cops hunting him out from under some rubble, because Batman values all life.

Another brief scene with the Penguin, but a one-sided blitz from the Batman this time, rather than a "fight" per se.

Again, it'd be cool if there were a reversal of Batman finding a way to use Penguin's own birds against him or using bats against Penguin, as you mentioned earlier in the thread. Just for the whole turnaround-is-fair-play thing.

The Catwoman will attack Falcone in his own home and quickly escape.

I'd like to think of this as a romance scene between Batman and Catwoman, even though Batman isn't in the scene. Think of it as showing they're "soulmates" (as much as I hate using a word like that). Catwoman plans her heists as carefully as Batman plans his raids and receives just as much pleasure in stealing something that Batman does in saving someone. Maybe a scene where Catwoman scopes out Falcone's defenses through binoculars (contrast with Batman reviewing blueprints and such on the Batcomputer) and says "This is going to be fun." Again, showing that they're basically two of a kind.

 

[Herr Logan]

I could see this as Bruce picking a fight with one thug and then quickly finding himself outnumbered and outgunned (literally) when other, unrelated lowlifes join in the fight on the side of the inital thug. Perhaps have him realize he needs allies (as in Gordon, not Robin... yet, at least) here.

I don't really see the two issues as being connected, since James Gordon wouldn't be alongside the Batman in an actual fight, and the major lesson learned from this fight was always (as seen in 'Batman: Year One' and also 'Batman: Mask of the Phantasm') supposed to be that he needs to scare his opponents before the first punch/kick/shuriken/whatever is thrown.

At this point in the story (the entirety of the first movie), the Batman needs Gordon because Gordon can keep closer tabs on the activities of the corrupt Gotham City Police Department, both the crimes committed thereby and the criminals going in and out of the system. That sort of thing is really all the Batman needs from Gordon for now, as Gordon, even as a lieutenant, doesn't have a lot of authority in the current set-up (other than being charged with leading a task force to capture the Batman-- an assignment he decides he doesn't want soon after he receives it, when he learns that the Batman is a force for good). The Batman will have a better handle on those things when he creates the official Batcomputer (which can access pretty much all police records and other information through hacking) by the second movie, and Gordon will be in a higher position of authority, thereby keeping his usefulness to the Batman.

Also, police officers would enter the fight and wound Bruce, just like in 'Year One,' so it's not just street thugs.

Okay, seems like you have the basic concept of this fight pretty well thought-out.

Thank ye kindly.

This I could see as Batman getting his own game turned against him. He uses strategy and knowledge of the environment against his prey, Oswald knows the environment and so has a homefield advantage on Batman. Think of it happening in a giant room full of bird cages, with the conclusion of Penguin releasing all the birds and them immediately attacking Batman. Possibly the birds are trained to give away Batman's position (canaries sing when he gets near them, owls hoot, etc.). Establish this in an earlier scene where it's more innocuous, like Penguin walking through the birdhouse and being serenaded by the soudns of the birds he approaches.

Have you by any chance read the set-up of this fight I posted earlier? I doubt I put an actual play-by-play, but it gives the basics. Thanks to the God damn Hype search engine missing over a year's worth of posts, it'll be hell to find it, but I will try.

These are self-explanatory, but important as a change of pace from the smooth, martial arts of Batman's fights.

This is true. Of course, Gordon's beating up Flass using the same Green Beret training, leaving him without need of medical assistance and tied up and naked so Flass would never tell anyone he did it... that does seem like the kind of thing the Batman would do, doesn't it? That's psychological tactics, right there.

I could see this again being important for the reversal. Batman is in control of the environments, using lots of tools. Then...


He has all his tools stripped away and has to improvise. I could see Batman getting really torn up here and pressing on. As a twist, maybe Batman has to race upstairs to evade the rising flames. Climaxes with him getting to the roof, cornered by police helicopters, then summoning the bats and deploying his cape as glider wings to make his escape. Also, it'd be kinda cool if he risked getting caught to pull one of the corrupt cops hunting him out from under some rubble, because Batman values all life.

All of that sounds perfect, especially that last part.

How's that going to look for the police if the Batman not only escapes but rescues one of his would-be captors in the midst of a burning, crumbling building that is only in that state to begin with because the police dropped a bomb on it from a helicopter? Not very heroic.

Again, it'd be cool if there were a reversal of Batman finding a way to use Penguin's own birds against him or using bats against Penguin, as you mentioned earlier in the thread. Just for the whole turnaround-is-fair-play thing.

I never actually thought of the Batman using the birds against the Penguin physically. I was going to have him remember everything that went down with the Penguin the first time, prepare for it, and take out the birds immediately with gas when he came back so it wouldn't happen again. It's not only just making it safe for himself, but it hits the Penguin psychologically, since he doesn't know the birds are just sleeping instead of dead. I'm not really sure how he could use the birds against Cobblepot other than this. What are your thoughts on that?

I was also going to have the Penguin's use of birds in their first fight be the inspiration for the Batman using bats against the police.

I'd like to think of this as a romance scene between Batman and Catwoman, even though Batman isn't in the scene. Think of it as showing they're "soulmates" (as much as I hate using a word like that). Catwoman plans her heists as carefully as Batman plans his raids and receives just as much pleasure in stealing something that Batman does in saving someone. Maybe a scene where Catwoman scopes out Falcone's defenses through binoculars (contrast with Batman reviewing blueprints and such on the Batcomputer) and says "This is going to be fun." Again, showing that they're basically two of a kind.

Good points.
I would have the timing be different, though.


I would have shown Selina Kyle-- in a black bodysuit, balaclava and climbing gear-- witness the Batman in action, either in his first costume appearance or somewhere near the mid-point of the film. I was originally going to have her hanging out of a building by her climbing wires right while retreating from a completed heist, but this could also happen while she's surveying her target's home through binoculars. Either way, she'll be impressed with the Batman's performance and inspired to put on an animal-themed costume herself, to empower herself psychologically.

The scene she's in, near the very end, would have her in Falcone's mansion when Falcone is talking to his consiglieri about why they have to be successful in their activities on the East End of Gotham to keep respect from the other criminals, now that their contacts in the GCPD and several key family soldiers and associates are locked up or otherwise out of the game. Catwoman will slink out of the shadows, knock the consiglieri out, scratch Falcone's face (leaving three scars, like in 'Year One') and warn him to stay away from the East End (her territory).

Catwoman would be given plenty of attention in the second film (which would, in a perfect world, be released the very next year, as the first two films and a year later the third and fourth films would be filmed back-to-back straight through), where we could actually see her planning and executing a heist simultaneously while the Batman plans and executes a raid, rescue or other tactical operation. That's kind of what you had in mind, right?

Do you think that's a decent set-up?


Thanks for posting, Zev.

 

[Zev]

I don't really see the two issues as being connected, since James Gordon wouldn't be alongside the Batman in an actual fight, and the major lesson learned from this fight was always (as seen in 'Batman: Year One' and also 'Batman: Mask of the Phantasm') supposed to be that he needs to scare his opponents before the first punch/kick/shuriken/whatever is thrown.

At this point in the story (the entirety of the first movie), the Batman needs Gordon because Gordon can keep closer tabs on the activities of the corrupt Gotham City Police Department, both the crimes committed thereby and the criminals going in and out of the system. That sort of thing is really all the Batman needs from Gordon for now, as Gordon, even as a lieutenant, doesn't have a lot of authority in the current set-up (other than being charged with leading a task force to capture the Batman-- an assignment he decides he doesn't want soon after he receives it, when he learns that the Batman is a force for good). The Batman will have a better handle on those things when he creates the official Batcomputer (which can access pretty much all police records and other information through hacking) by the second movie, and Gordon will be in a higher position of authority, thereby keeping his usefulness to the Batman.

Also, police officers would enter the fight and wound Bruce, just like in 'Year One,' so it's not just street thugs.

To be fair, police officers entering the fight could also give Bruce the idea of having his own "man" inside the GCPD, but whatever works for you.

Have you by any chance read the set-up of this fight I posted earlier? I doubt I put an actual play-by-play, but it gives the basics. Thanks to the God damn Hype search engine missing over a year's worth of posts, it'll be hell to find it, but I will try.

Think I missed it. You might want to edit the first page to have a Table of Contents with links to important posts before the thread gets too large and unwieldy to wade through.

I never actually thought of the Batman using the birds against the Penguin physically. I was going to have him remember everything that went down with the Penguin the first time, prepare for it, and take out the birds immediately with gas when he came back so it wouldn't happen again. It's not only just making it safe for himself, but it hits the Penguin psychologically, since he doesn't know the birds are just sleeping instead of dead. I'm not really sure how he could use the birds against Cobblepot other than this. What are your thoughts on that?

I was also going to have the Penguin's use of birds in their first fight be the inspiration for the Batman using bats against the police.

Well, and this is just a thought, you could have Penguin try to escape through helicopter-umbrella and Batman throwing some kind of ultrasonic device (perhaps jury-rigging the gadget he uses to summon bats) onto Penguins so that the birds clog the propellors and Penguin takes a fall. Or it could just foul up his navigation to the point where he crashes into a billboard or something. A bit brutal, depending on how it's played, but effective. I think that's about the only way Batman would NEED to use a gimmick like turning Penguin's own birds against him rather than just giving him an old-fashioned whoopin'.

I would have shown Selina Kyle-- in a black bodysuit, balaclava and climbing gear-- witness the Batman in action, either in his first costume appearance or somewhere near the mid-point of the film. I was originally going to have her hanging out of a building by her climbing wires right while retreating from a completed heist, but this could also happen while she's surveying her target's home through binoculars. Either way, she'll be impressed with the Batman's performance and inspired to put on an animal-themed costume herself, to empower herself psychologically.

The scene she's in, near the very end, would have her in Falcone's mansion when Falcone is talking to his consiglieri about why they have to be successful in their activities on the East End of Gotham to keep respect from the other criminals, now that their contacts in the GCPD and several key family soldiers and associates are locked up or otherwise out of the game. Catwoman will slink out of the shadows, knock the consiglieri out, scratch Falcone's face (leaving three scars, like in 'Year One') and warn him to stay away from the East End (her territory).

Catwoman would be given plenty of attention in the second film (which would, in a perfect world, be released the very next year, as the first two films and a year later the third and fourth films would be filmed back-to-back straight through), where we could actually see her planning and executing a heist simultaneously while the Batman plans and executes a raid, rescue or other tactical operation. That's kind of what you had in mind, right?

Do you think that's a decent set-up?

Alright. Mainly I was hoping to parallel Batman and Catwoman as flipsides of the same coin (Batman grim, stoic, enforcing the law; Catwoman joyful, enthusiastic, breaking the law). Maybe throw subtlety to the wind and go all John Woo, playing ballad music as Batman slo-mo threshes some thugs in a raid while Catwoman evades security guards to get into Falcone's mansion. Lots of cross-cutting and ironic segues to really build up the first meeting between Batman and Catwoman. People should leave the theater WANTING to see that sequel where Batman and Catwoman throw down and believe that Catwoman can win (which she... pretty much does. Often. Because Selina Kyle? Not so much with the jail time).

 

[Zaphod]

As in Jon Favereau from 'Swingers,' 'Made,' and 'Dardevil'?

Is this from news reports or a hypothetical question?

I don't know, honestly. I think whoever is directing this movie is a lowlife plebeian if they dare use the suggested idea of making Tony Stark's father the main villain, or even just give the father a large focus in the movie.

I am not very familiar with Iron Man, at least compared to how familiar I am with the X-Men, Spider-Man and even Batman comics, but I know enough to know that such a plot device is completely inconsistent with the comics and also a straight rip-off of 'Hulk.' I mean, in a Hulk movie, Banner's father should definitely have a big focus on the impact he left on Bruce's life, but he shouldn't be alive in present day and shouldn't be the present-day villain. These people disgust me!

So, yeah, that's all I have to say about that for right now.

Not hypothetical, the guy is directing the thing:
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=229924

Alas, the term 'realism' pops up again, which probaly means no Mandarin. But there wasn't mention of any Stark's father business either, Favereau said this about the villains of the movie:

I think the technology-based villains lend themselves better to the universe that we’re dealing with. Not necessarily the types that are magical or imbued with God-given abilities and mutations. I’d rather go with people grounded in reality and see how far you can push that with out losing the realism that this franchise offers.

Justin Hammer? Obadiah Stane? Anyway, back on topic.

 

[Zaphod]

Well, and this is just a thought, you could have Penguin try to escape through helicopter-umbrella and Batman throwing some kind of ultrasonic device (perhaps jury-rigging the gadget he uses to summon bats) onto Penguins so that the birds clog the propellors and Penguin takes a fall. Or it could just foul up his navigation to the point where he crashes into a billboard or something. A bit brutal, depending on how it's played, but effective. I think that's about the only way Batman would NEED to use a gimmick like turning Penguin's own birds against him rather than just giving him an old-fashioned whoopin'.

My initial idea was to include a scene involving Penguin attempting to escape Batman by way of helicopter-umbrella in this first movie. I thought it could probaly take place the first time Batman pays a visit to Cobblepot and gets owned by the birds, gun-umbrella's in Herr's original plan for this scene. I dont know how I would have done it, but one idea I had was to have Penguin fly his umbrella (which should look and function more or less the very same as the one seen in 'Batman Returns') through a skylight in the ceiling of his suite, which he would open with a transmitter-device mid-flight. We decided to save this for Movie #2 in the end.

 

[Herr Logan]

To be fair, police officers entering the fight could also give Bruce the idea of having his own "man" inside the GCPD, but whatever works for you.

I assume you're suggesting this as a way to get the Batman thinking about Jim Gordon (or just the role Gordon would play in his War on Crime) much earlier than he did in 'Year One,' which is something I plan to do.

I think it might work better if police officers come upon a scene where the Batman (fully costumed) has just taken down several mobbed-up criminals and open fire immediately on him, or something like that, and this happens shortly after his initial debut in costume. Or, the idea of having a man on the inside could occur to him even before Bruce's fateful plainclothes misadventure, while he's doing some preliminary recon in Gotham. Maybe it could go down sort of like how Zaphod suggested earlier (I think) where he seeks out a good District Attorney and also a Sergeant or Lieutenant amenable to working with him, since that allows him to work alongside and within the system to an extent, and that's what he'd need to do to get anything done long-term, since he won't kill.

Think I missed it. You might want to edit the first page to have a Table of Contents with links to important posts before the thread gets too large and unwieldy to wade through.

"Important posts"? All posts written by me are important.


Well, I posed the question toward the beginning, whether I should let this stand as one thread for all subjects or break it up into separate threads. But no one suggested I go with the latter. No one believed we would make it this far. But I showed 'em... I showed 'em all!

So, does anyone think I should attempt to break this thread into several different threads by subject? I would have to go through all pages and quote every non-spam post, repeating several posts because some address different subjects. This will take for freakin' ever, but for you guys, I'm willing to go the distance. What say you all? Seriously, respond and let the people's suggestions influence my will that shall be done!

Well, and this is just a thought, you could have Penguin try to escape through helicopter-umbrella and Batman throwing some kind of ultrasonic device (perhaps jury-rigging the gadget he uses to summon bats) onto Penguins so that the birds clog the propellors and Penguin takes a fall. Or it could just foul up his navigation to the point where he crashes into a billboard or something. A bit brutal, depending on how it's played, but effective. I think that's about the only way Batman would NEED to use a gimmick like turning Penguin's own birds against him rather than just giving him an old-fashioned whoopin'.

Hmm... that's something to consider. Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Alright. Mainly I was hoping to parallel Batman and Catwoman as flipsides of the same coin (Batman grim, stoic, enforcing the law; Catwoman joyful, enthusiastic, breaking the law). Maybe throw subtlety to the wind and go all John Woo, playing ballad music as Batman slo-mo threshes some thugs in a raid while Catwoman evades security guards to get into Falcone's mansion. Lots of cross-cutting and ironic segues to really build up the first meeting between Batman and Catwoman. People should leave the theater WANTING to see that sequel where Batman and Catwoman throw down and believe that Catwoman can win (which she... pretty much does. Often. Because Selina Kyle? Not so much with the jail time).

Also something to consider. Zaphod, what do you think about this?

EDIT: Zaphod already addressed this.


Thank you much for posting, Zev.

 

[Herr Logan]

Not hypothetical, the guy is directing the thing:
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=229924

Alas, the term 'realism' pops up again, which probaly means no Mandarin. But there wasn't mention of any Stark's father business either, Favereau said this about the villains of the movie:



Justin Hammer? Obadiah Stane? Anyway, back on topic.
[/font][/font]

Yeah, the "realism" remark was disappointing. I can deal with more of that with Iron Man than other superhero franchises, since he became more of a sci-fi character than a fantasy one (not that he still isn't fantastic and pseudoscientific), but that word still makes my skin crawl when spoken by movie producers (is in anyone who helps make the movie, not just official "producers").
He didn't mention Daddy Dearest, but I'm going to assume he will use that bull$hit plot, because the power of negative thinking is a great power indeed.


By the way, this is on topic for this thread, since the Safe Haven is to discuss all superhero properties. Again, it has grown beyond anyone's expectations (the power of negative thinking prevails again) and I am considering breaking it up into different threads. What do you think about that?

If I break it up into different threads, everyone who hangs out here is still welcome to visit and contribute to all Safe Haven spin-off threads, but it will have to be on topic, specific to which thread it's in. The ground rules will be the same though (no defending unfaithful movie aspects without providing equal criticism, no arguing, no using the "F" word [fanboy] and the like derogatorily).

Consider the risk involved, though; if I put these threads in franchise-specific forums, there is more risk of interference by people who do not respect our way of life. None of the mods like me very much, so when I go to them to dispatch invaders (you guys know I can hold my own in a quarrel, but I don't want this place to be a battleground of any sort... it's supposed to be a Safe Haven), they may not come to the rescue. Just keep that in mind. I'm willing to take the risks, but I wanted to point them out.

 

[Cullen]

In other news:

Zaphod, Cullen, where's the love you promised me?

Sorry, sorry, sorry. I was being the anti JMS and doing research, specifically on the Joker. Been busy with that and what I laughingly call my writing.

it'll come.... I hope...

 

[AeonFlux]

Thank you Logan for the invite here. You know it is sad when the cartoon gets it right but the movie doesn't. X-Men is my example of not a really good movie. Logan was all wrong in that movie and the rest were just bit players. Sabretooth was a complete joke and waste. I waited for the Saban X-Men type Logan and Creed battle. That battle on the screen was utter crap, Singer is not someone I would have picked for this. One day a really director who knows X-Men will create the real X-Men movie we fans want to see.

I TOTALLY AGREE! I thought the same thing when I first saw the 1st X-Men movie(I didn't want to go at all ever since Anna Packin was casted as Rogue. I knew right away that was a TERRIBLE choice!) but my brother talked me into giving it a chance so I did and I regret spending money on it! The cartoon may not have been 100% perfect to the comics but it was close enough who cares that they changed something like how Rogue got Ms. Marvels powers exactly(in the comic she fought with her on a bridge and then after stealing all her powers she threw her off of it. In the cartoon Rogue steals a jet and Ms. Marvel comes to stop her and Mystique tells Rogue to grab her and not let go until Mystique said so).
I really wanna see a REAL X-Men movie. The third looks pretty cool but I won't see it cause Anna Packin just ruins it for me. She took my fav. X-Men and turned her into a worthless thing that is the opposite of the real Rogue! I want to see a sassy Rogue that says sugah and is flirty and tough as nails(even when Rogue first got her powers yeah she was scared but she was more frustrated. I remember a certain comic where Rogue had kissed some boys and Mystique got mad at her and she got all frustrated. This was right when Rogue first joined Mystique. She never was weak, ever! And that goes for before she got Ms. Marvel's powers.)
Anyways I'm sure you all have heard enough complaints about Rogue. I'm just glad nobody will get mad at me not liking the movie or that Rogue. Great forum topic!

 

[Herr Logan]

Sorry, sorry, sorry. I was being the anti JMS and doing research, specifically on the Joker. Been busy with that and what I laughingly call my writing.

it'll come.... I hope...

Research? Are you mad??


It's all good... as long as you give up the goods real soon.

How about answering that question I posed to everyone earlier today?

 

[Herr Logan]

I TOTALLY AGREE! I thought the same thing when I first saw the 1st X-Men movie(I didn't want to go at all ever since Anna Packin was casted as Rogue. I knew right away that was a TERRIBLE choice!) but my brother talked me into giving it a chance so I did and I regret spending money on it! The cartoon may not have been 100% perfect to the comics but it was close enough who cares that they changed something like how Rogue got Ms. Marvels powers exactly(in the comic she fought with her on a bridge and then after stealing all her powers she threw her off of it. In the cartoon Rogue steals a jet and Ms. Marvel comes to stop her and Mystique tells Rogue to grab her and not let go until Mystique said so).
I really wanna see a REAL X-Men movie. The third looks pretty cool but I won't see it cause Anna Packin just ruins it for me. She took my fav. X-Men and turned her into a worthless thing that is the opposite of the real Rogue! I want to see a sassy Rogue that says sugah and is flirty and tough as nails(even when Rogue first got her powers yeah she was scared but she was more frustrated. I remember a certain comic where Rogue had kissed some boys and Mystique got mad at her and she got all frustrated. This was right when Rogue first joined Mystique. She never was weak, ever! And that goes for before she got Ms. Marvel's powers.)
Anyways I'm sure you all have heard enough complaints about Rogue. I'm just glad nobody will get mad at me not liking the movie or that Rogue. Great forum topic!

Thanks, Aeon.

I agree with you on everything except the idea that Rogue by herself could ruin a movie that includes everything else that was wrong with the last two movies (besides Priesty McMopecrawler, who had every reason to quit this piss-poor project after Brian Singer made him spend extra hours in makeup to add superfluous tatoos whose only purpose was to make Singer seem creative...). Wolverine is still a pale, weak imitation, Cyclops is still the franchise' b1tch, Xavier may or may not die, Jean Grey and Wolverine still had something more potent between them than she and Cyclops, and on and on and on... Rogue is just one of many inexcusable screw-ups of this franchise. On the plus side, she was used as a plot device to showcase one of the only things they got right about Wolverine-- his penchant for getting attached to adolescent girls who need a semi-psychotic mentor figure in their lives. That doesn't excuse their messing with her character, though. Not at all.

I'd have waited until the second, third or fourth movie to bring in Rogue, if it went as such:

Movie 1: Intro to Xavier and X-Men philosophy and mission, featuring Cyclops, Marvel Girl, the Beast, Iceman, and the Angel as team members. Villains are the Brotherhood of Mutants-- Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, Toad, Mastermind and maybe Unus the Untouchable-- led by Magneto.

Movie 2: Second generation enters, featuring Cyclops, Storm, Wolverine, Nightcrawler, Colossus and Kitty Pryde. Brotherhood of Mutants led by Mystique include Blob, Pryo, Destiny, Avalanche, and perhaps Rogue.

Movie 3: Dark Phoenix Saga, possibly with the Shi'ar aspects cut out completely. Jean Grey returns to the X-Men in the beginning and has a near-death experience and is possessed by an entity which enhances her power and gradually becomes malevolent. The Beast returns also, but in his furry incarnation. The villains would be the Hellfire Club-- Sebastian Shaw, Emma Frost, Donald Pierce, Harry Leland, an army of henchmen and Emma's Hellions. Sentinels are possible villains as well. Phoenix destroys herself toward the end,

Movie 4: Nightcrawler, Colossus and Kitty Pryde are injured in battle and take an extended leave from the team. The remaining original members, Iceman and Angel, rejoin the team. Rogue seeks Xavier's help and also joins. Gambit and Jubilee join as well. Mr. Sinister and cronies as villain.

Welcome to the Haven, Aeon, and thanks for posting.

 

[Herr Logan]

Coming soon: Multiple Safe Havens!

Sometime in the near future, I plan to create Safe Haven threads for each superhero property we've discussed so far. I'm going through this entire thread now to sort the different posts by subject so they can be available to both old and new contributors for reference in the new threads, but I'm not sure how to implement them. I'm making lists of the links for previous posts, which I may just post at the beginning of each new thread. I may get a small number of posts from here actually placed in new threads, but I'm not sure. What are your thoughts on this?

I plan to make threads for Spider-Man, X-Men, Batman, Daredevil, Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Hulk, Captain America, Superman, and possibly more.
The same rules will apply for the new threads as for this one (see first page).


Actual feedback on this proposal this time would be appreciated.

 

[Cullen]

Coming soon: Multiple Safe Havens!

Sometime in the near future, I plan to create Safe Haven threads for each superhero property we've discussed so far. I'm going through this entire thread now to sort the different posts by subject so they can be available to both old and new contributors for reference in the new threads, but I'm not sure how to implement them. I'm making lists of the links for previous posts, which I may just post at the beginning of each new thread. I may get a small number of posts from here actually placed in new threads, but I'm not sure. What are your thoughts on this?

I plan to make threads for Spider-Man, X-Men, Batman, Daredevil, Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Hulk, Captain America, Superman, and possibly more.
The same rules will apply for the new threads as for this one (see first page).


Actual feedback on this proposal this time would be appreciated.

Sounds like a lot of work on your part managing all of that. But, on the plus side, there are several threads there that you won't see me in...

 

[Mister J]

That does seem like a lot of work HL. If it's your belief that the ideas are better served by separation, I can't argue with you. It may garner more interest from a larger part of the Hype's membership, thusly increasing idea flow. At any rate, I do believe that linking (or copying) the relevant posts from this thread in each respective Haven would be the most direct way to stimulate thought.

Please advise if I completely whiffed on the type of feedback you were looking for.

 

[AeonFlux]

Thanks, Aeon.

I agree with you on everything except the idea that Rogue by herself could ruin a movie that includes everything else that was wrong with the last two movies (besides Priesty McMopecrawler, who had every reason to quit this piss-poor project after Brian Singer made him spend extra hours in makeup to add superfluous tatoos whose only purpose was to make Singer seem creative...). Wolverine is still a pale, weak imitation, Cyclops is still the franchise' b1tch, Xavier may or may not die, Jean Grey and Wolverine still had something more potent between them than she and Cyclops, and on and on and on... Rogue is just one of many inexcusable screw-ups of this franchise. On the plus side, she was used as a plot device to showcase one of the only things they got right about Wolverine-- his penchant for getting attached to adolescent girls who need a semi-psychotic mentor figure in their lives. That doesn't excuse their messing with her character, though. Not at all.

I'd have waited until the second, third or fourth movie to bring in Rogue, if it went as such:

Movie 1: Intro to Xavier and X-Men philosophy and mission, featuring Cyclops, Marvel Girl, the Beast, Iceman, and the Angel as team members. Villains are the Brotherhood of Mutants-- Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, Toad, Mastermind and maybe Unus the Untouchable-- led by Magneto.

Movie 2: Second generation enters, featuring Cyclops, Storm, Wolverine, Nightcrawler, Colossus and Kitty Pryde. Brotherhood of Mutants led by Mystique include Blob, Pryo, Destiny, Avalanche, and perhaps Rogue.

Movie 3: Dark Phoenix Saga, possibly with the Shi'ar aspects cut out completely. Jean Grey returns to the X-Men in the beginning and has a near-death experience and is possessed by an entity which enhances her power and gradually becomes malevolent. The Beast returns also, but in his furry incarnation. The villains would be the Hellfire Club-- Sebastian Shaw, Emma Frost, Donald Pierce, Harry Leland, an army of henchmen and Emma's Hellions. Sentinels are possible villains as well. Phoenix destroys herself toward the end,

Movie 4: Nightcrawler, Colossus and Kitty Pryde are injured in battle and take an extended leave from the team. The remaining original members, Iceman and Angel, rejoin the team. Rogue seeks Xavier's help and also joins. Gambit and Jubilee join as well. Mr. Sinister and cronies as villain.

Welcome to the Haven, Aeon, and thanks for posting.

Thanks for welcoming me here! I'm really glad you made this for people to vent out their anger and not get yelled at by people who don't know what they are talking about.
Yeah your right that Anna alone didn't ruin the movie, cause they were really really bad, but for the 3rd it looks kinda cool and definitly better than the last 2 but I won't be seeing it cause I can't stand that hideous thing as Rogue. I totally agree with you too! I can't believe people say movie Wolverine is "Sooo awesome! Kick ass! blah blah blah" I think he is majorly weak and nothing like the real Wolverine! I grew up mostly with the 90s cartoon(that got it right!) so I didn't really read the comics until about 7 years ago. So I don't know a lot about X-Men(but definitly more than the ones who like the films), except when it comes to Rogue cause I just love her! So I totally feel your pain with Wolverine being messed up.(he obviously is your fav character.) I really really love your ideas for the X-Men movies! They are totally awesome and my little sisters are agreeing with me!(They HATE the movies with a burning passion!) And it could work cause the cartoon series did it and movies run longer so it can definitly work! See that is the biggest mistake they made going into these films. They left the fans out! With something so big like X-Men you can't hire a Director who knows nothing about it and cast people as the characters who weren't into the X-Men or knew about it either and look nothing like their characters and expect the fans to love it. They should have done what Chris Nolan is doing with Batman(well at least this is what I hear) asking the fans who they want for the roles! I bet you if they had done this in the beginning, Hugh Jackman, Anna Packin, and most of the cast would have never even been mentioned for the characters! Have you seen the alternate X-Men cast post( http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=212054 ) some of the choices are good. Like Sean Bean for Magneto(I never would have thought, but those pictures have convinced me), Brian Dennehy as Beast, Emmy Rossum as Shadowcat, Vladimir Kulich as Sabretooth, Malcolm-Jamal Warner as Bishop, and my choice for Rogue(out of the actresses I know of): Kate Beckinsale.
But anyways you should totally write the scripts for those and hopefully in the future they will remake X-Men and your scripts could be it! I mean they do this to Batman, why not X-Men?

 

[Herr Logan]

Sounds like a lot of work on your part managing all of that. But, on the plus side, there are several threads there that you won't see me in...

Yes, Cullen, that was exactly the reason I decided to expand my realm into separate venues-- to avoid you!


Anyhow, I hope I'll still see you in at least one or two of them (Spider-Man and Batman, maybe?), and that you post that idea you were foreshadowing earlier.


If anyone has anything they want to post in the Safe Haven, feel free to do it here for now. I don't know when exactly the expansion will take place, but it may not be for a few days. Let business continue as usual (or better!) for the meantime.

 

[Herr Logan]

That does seem like a lot of work HL. If it's your belief that the ideas are better served by separation, I can't argue with you. It may garner more interest from a larger part of the Hype's membership, thusly increasing idea flow. At any rate, I do believe that linking (or copying) the relevant posts from this thread in each respective Haven would be the most direct way to stimulate thought.

On the contrary, you can argue with me, as long as you're respectful (that means bowing and scraping and stroking my ego at every opportunity... but this you already know).

Seriously, if you believe that separation is a bad idea, you should say so and give your reasons. I may not act on your suggestion, but I'd like to hear it and take it into account. Decision-making is actually a weak point for me, so the more input I have may either complicate things or expidite things, and I'd rather err on the side of collecting more information, not less.

The reason I'm doing this isn't purely to increase the flow of ideas per se, but that purpose goes hand-in-hand with another in some ways.
Our friend Everyman recently asked me about my Fantastic Four movie ideas, on which I wrote a good chunk of text months ago, and I'd rather repost what I've posted (or link it) than try to do it from scratch. I have to comb through the thread again and I haven't had the chance to find it yet. Some organization could have helped me have this dug up by now.
Soon after that, I got this:

Think I missed it. You might want to edit the first page to have a Table of Contents with links to important posts before the thread gets too large and unwieldy to wade through.

I'm not sure how a table of contents is supposed to work with a thread like this, and I would have to update it constantly. Branching out will take a lot of work if I'm to link previous posts, but at least it will be pretty much a one-time thing. Organization, or at least compartmentalization, could help the Safe Haven.

I said in the beginning of the thread that it may be best to spread out the subjects so people could more easily keep track of ideas. Also, the fact that this thread is now large and so much has been said already could intimidating to potential new posters. If expansion doesn't increase the traffic of ideas in the various threads, at least it'll still be more managable, organized and less threatening.

Anyone who wants to repost their own previous posts in a new thread for reference or discussion is welcome to do so, unless it's one of the few posts that go against the philosophy of the thread. A lot of the posts I linked are under my own name, since I happened to be the one who responded to other posts with quotes the most here, and it saves room and time to link one post that carries the content of two posts. I'm aware there is a risk in branching out into the "-World" forums (ex. Spidey-World, X-World, etc.) in that more people may take a look and feel the need to post sentiments that are against the rules. I have at least one moderator's blessing, and I think we'll have the same protection any other thread would have against trolls. I only pick fights in threads that aren't specifically designated as love-fests where only praise is expected of contributors, such as "Appreciation" threads and so forth. By the same token, nobody should be able to come in here and harrass us with their conformist attitudes. I've written up a standard opening post for each thread that restates the philosophy and rules, mostly the same as before.


Let it be known that if the Hype's search engine wasn't missing over a year's worth of results, expansion of the Haven may not have been necessary. Then again, maybe it would, since there are so many posts that refer to the same subjects.

Please advise if I completely whiffed on the type of feedback you were looking for.

No, it's not like that. I just wanted to get people's thoughts on the expansion idea before I wasted too much time collecting links.

I'll probably go with your suggestion of linking the threads and start more or less fresh from there. New posts and cut-'n-pasted reposts should probably be accompanied by a label for the idea or series of discussion for that idea, the better to find later on if the threads become large like this one has.



If anyone else has input/feedback on this issue, speak the hell up!

 

[Zev]

Personally, I'd rather keep all the Safe Havens in one thread. Firstly, it's just more centralized and allows for some variety. So we go from "everyone talks about X-Men" to "everyone talks about Batman" and so on and so forth. I think most of the Safe Havens would die a quick death or become infrequently updated, given as how it is a somewhat specialized topic.

 

[Herr Logan]

Personally, I'd rather keep all the Safe Havens in one thread. Firstly, it's just more centralized and allows for some variety. So we go from "everyone talks about X-Men" to "everyone talks about Batman" and so on and so forth. I think most of the Safe Havens would die a quick death or become infrequently updated, given as how it is a somewhat specialized topic.

Regarding some Havens dying quickly, I'm not overly worried about certain ones, since I don't have much to contribute personally anyway. If other people posted in them, I'd respond to one degree or another (I may not have anything useful to say), but if no one did, as long as people kept making suggestions for one or two of them, that could keep me happy, personally. But that's my selfish point of view, and not the only one I'm taking into account.

I'll make a tentative decision when I hear from more people. In the meantime, I may or may not continue collecting post links (depending on how lazy I am), so if more people do prefer expansion, I can post the lists sooner rather than later.

Thanks for the feedback, Zev.

So far we've got one definitive vote for "no" (Zev), one vague/ambiguous vote (Mister J), and one vote for "yes" (Hunter Rider, in PMs). Cullen doesn't count as usual (mostly because he doesn't seem to care much one way or another).

Keep it comin' people, with business as usual as well as this new issue.

 

[Herr Logan]

Thanks for welcoming me here! I'm really glad you made this for people to vent out their anger and not get yelled at by people who don't know what they are talking about.

Just so we're clear, this thread isn't primarily for venting the anger that comes from the piss-poor quality and infidelity to the source material of superhero movies. It's allowed, but that shouldn't be the focus. The focus is to come up with ideas for something better, in as much detail as possible. But yeah, a little ranting here and there is okay, as long as the majority of what you post is creative and constructive instead of retrospectively critical. Anti-source material studio apologists aren't allowed to interfere with us, so unless an insolent interloper dares violate the sanctity of our Haven, we need not dwell on they and their inferior and shallow critiques.

Yeah your right that Anna alone didn't ruin the movie, cause they were really really bad, but for the 3rd it looks kinda cool and definitly better than the last 2 but I won't be seeing it cause I can't stand that hideous thing as Rogue. I totally agree with you too! I can't believe people say movie Wolverine is "Sooo awesome! Kick ass! blah blah blah" I think he is majorly weak and nothing like the real Wolverine! I grew up mostly with the 90s cartoon(that got it right!) so I didn't really read the comics until about 7 years ago. So I don't know a lot about X-Men(but definitly more than the ones who like the films), except when it comes to Rogue cause I just love her! So I totally feel your pain with Wolverine being messed up.(he obviously is your fav character.) I really really love your ideas for the X-Men movies! They are totally awesome and my little sisters are agreeing with me!(They HATE the movies with a burning passion!) And it could work cause the cartoon series did it and movies run longer so it can definitly work! See that is the biggest mistake they made going into these films. They left the fans out! With something so big like X-Men you can't hire a Director who knows nothing about it and cast people as the characters who weren't into the X-Men or knew about it either and look nothing like their characters and expect the fans to love it. They should have done what Chris Nolan is doing with Batman(well at least this is what I hear) asking the fans who they want for the roles! I bet you if they had done this in the beginning, Hugh Jackman, Anna Packin, and most of the cast would have never even been mentioned for the characters!

Have you seen the alternate X-Men cast post( http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=212054 ) some of the choices are good. Like Sean Bean for Magneto(I never would have thought, but those pictures have convinced me), Brian Dennehy as Beast, Emmy Rossum as Shadowcat, Vladimir Kulich as Sabretooth, Malcolm-Jamal Warner as Bishop, and my choice for Rogue(out of the actresses I know of): Kate Beckinsale.

Kate Beckinsale for Rogue? I forget if her frame is conducive to a curvy body or not (not that I wasn't looking when I saw 'Underworld 2,' I just have a bad memory, is all). Rogue has to be curvy. She should also look pretty young when she first shows up, like perhaps just under 18 in the second movie.

Emmy Rossum looks good as Shadowcat. She can't look like she's taller than 5'3", though. Wolverine is supposed to be the shortest male full-grown X-Man, but he's still as taller or slightly taller than his adolescent female sidekicks (Kitty Pryde, Jubilation Lee).

I wouldn't have Bishop in a movie, personally. I don't like him, just like I don't like Cable, or any other time-travelling "badass" who needs to carry a gun to be a superhero. Malcolm Jamal Warner, wasn't he Theo on 'The Cosby Show'?

I'd personally choose Ron Pearlman as Sabretooth, but I wouldn't have Sabretooth in the first or second movies. Clancy Brown might have been a great choice when he was a little younger, too.


I've looked at that thread you mentioned a couple of times in the past. Lemme take another look-see...

Understand that I don't pick people I would cast definitively, because I know I don't know every suitable actor (I hate when people say things like "I can't think of anyone else who might be good, so this person should be cast") and I know that an "unknown" actor could be perfect for the role. By "unknown" I mean unknown, as in they'd have to be truly obscure in their previous work or just someone who answered a casting call who maybe did some theater work or went to a drama camp or something. I believe that the actor is not the star-making or deal-breaker for a character, but rather the writing is the key factor in everything. The director is very important, too. Only if an actor truly sucks at their job and the director either settles for a mediocre or crappy performance or demands one (like George Lucas in the 'Star Wars' prequels) can good writing be foiled by other factors.


Okay, I would never have come up with Sean Bean and wouldn't put him on a list if suggested right away, unless I saw an audition or reading that truly impressed me. I haven't seen every movie he's been in, but of the ones I've seen, he usually plays the same character-- cowardly, weak and psychopathic to some degree. Sometimes he plays a would-be hero who's too weak to fight against his baser impulses ('Fellowship of the Ring'), but he's played a traitor in almost everything I've seen him in.
I don't believe it's right to exclusively typecast though, so I wouldn't exclude him outright. He does have a decent enough look for Magneto, anyway, because yes, I would show a Magneto that looks younger than a Holocaust survivor would in real life. "Realism" should never be a top priority for a superhero movie, and to cut through all the complicated history in the comics that explains why Magneto looks younger (mainly the thing where Alpha de-aged him and Eric the Red re-aged him, I think), I'd simply have Xavier tell the X-Men that his mutant physiology keeps him in very good shape and relatively young-looking when one of them asks about it. Ideally, Magneto should look like he's in his 40's-50's but in peak condition. Hollywood is full of those, so it shouldn't be too hard.

I would not cast Brian Dennehy as the Beast. In my ideal X-Men movie series, it would start with the original team, where all of them are 18 except for Bobby Drake, who is 16. The Beast could be played by an actor who is older than 18, but the character should still look like a young man. The character himself could be considered more mature than most other X-Men, but he's also young at heart and very playful. I wouldn't cast anyone above the age of 30, unless someone above that age could pass for early 20's.

Tyra Banks has the perfect look for Storm. But she can't act her way out of a paper bag, so no. Damn shame.
Angela Basset is too old, although she's relatively young-looking for her real age, and smokin' hot. I'd want the character to at least look 25 at the very oldest when she appears in the second movie. The same would go for Nightcrawler, and Colossus can look like he's 25, but the character should be 18 by that point. Cyclops and the other original X-Men would have aged a few years in-between the first and second movies.

Billy Zane is a ridiculous choice for Xavier. What the hell are these people smoking? Lex Luthor, maybe, but not Xavier. I mean, God damn...
I don't know about Daniel Day-Lewis.

Joe Rogan (who I've never heard of before I saw that thread), seems like the perfect choice for Wolverine, physically. His frame is just right. I don't know how tall he is, but if he's significantly taller than 5'3", then there are ways of tricking the audience. If not simple camera tricks like having other characters stand on something while next to him, then the technology they used for the Hobbits in the 'Lord of the Rings' movies, although that's expensive and extreme. I don't know if this guy can act or if he ever has, though. Wolverine requires a decent actor. His character traits, to get them right, require a mixture of overtness and subtlety. Hugh Jackman was the wrong person to cast, but the true fault lies in the writing and directing. Even with that lacking script, Singer could have given us a real enough Wolverine if he just told Jackman to adopt certain mannerisms and speech patterns. A character like Nightcrawler or Colossus is easier to do than Wolverine, Cyclops or Storm (the latter needs a really good performance for the audience to willingly put up with her self-righteous, over-the-top manner), although every character has trademark behaviors that require effort and recognition by the actors and director.

James Franco has the right look for Nightcrawler. I don't know if he can pull off a decent German accent, though. I don't know how old he is, but actors older than their characters can pass if there are significant facial alterations like Nightcrawler and the Beast in his hairier form.

But anyways you should totally write the scripts for those and hopefully in the future they will remake X-Men and your scripts could be it! I mean they do this to Batman, why not X-Men?

Thanks for that, and thanks for posting.