• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

The Next "Blade" Movie...

^

Of the films, the only real disappointment was Blade Trinity. And even that had an interesting premise, just poorly executed. Blade v. Dracula could've been epic. It should've been epic.


Dracula (refuse to say "Drake")...should have been in his Vampire/Demon form the entire time. Not to knock Dominic Purcell, but the final product was a step down from Nomak in Blade II.

I didn't mind Parker Posey and her main group of baddies including Triple H. The vamps that bugged me were introduced in Abigail Whistler's fight at the subway (train?)...the group of teen vamps, thats a step down from the Reapers, and Deacon's Posse in part I...interesting to see if some backstory was maybe given, but ultimately unsatisfying compared to previous vamps...
 
Last edited:
Reboot.

First movie would be Blade's origin story with Frost etc. Also we got introduced Dr.Michael Morbius, he is a good guy trying to help Blade's hunger/vamprism but he accidently become the vampire at the end of the movie tragically.

If first movie becomes successful, 2nd movie would be about Blade is gonna hunt the guy who tried to help him back in day to rescue innocents or what... It would raise a lot of questions and that's good for the story.

I think it's time to see Morbius but with justice. His story is great for big screen. It's tragic & scary. He is a good guy becomes a danger for innocents because of an accident. Not just bad guy.
 
Hellion,

I still disagree with you about Parker Posey. I just felt she was too offbeat and not threatening enough, though to her credit she did have one really good scene where she tortured Hannibal about his thirst eventually overtaking him and him feeding on the little girl they kidnapped. But other than that, her crew was too lightweight.

Though I think you made a good point about Abigail. She wasn't that impressive to me to be honest. I also thought the movie was too murky when it came to whether vampires had been outed or not. The first two films at least were consistent in largely keeping vampires hidden from the general public. But with Trinity it seemed like that had broken down and that vamps were more public. Which seemed like it wouldn't make what Blade was doing all that big of a deal (though I know that the vamps also had control over law enforcement, to some extent). I wish the film had been more clear about how much people knew about vampires.

Regarding Grout and Blue Moon's comments about Blade 2. I have to admit you both had some good points. I was so taken with Blade 2 as I first saw it, it was such a rush that I was willing to overlook some of its faults. But I do wish that they had brought Karen Jenson back and I think that Blade's lack of development really hurt him in the long run because it opened the door for him to be upstaged by more 'interesting' characters like Hannibal & Abigail in Trinity and then Krista in the TV show.

I wish there had been more focus on his emotional journey and what little we got I credit that to Snipes. Because we saw what little Goyer thought of the character's journey largely without Snipes in the TV series.

Though the movies took Blade to another level, I must admit that I think the old 70's comics did a better job with his character development-from what I've read-and even some of the recent comics have given him a girlfriend, the vamp Spitfire. I don't see why the movies were so against allowing Blade to have a love interest. It's something I think Wesley Snipes wanted, because I think he understood how important that could be to the character's overall development and viability.

Back to Blade 2, I do wish it had followed on more from the first film, with Jenson, but also with the vampire politics. I do think that Goyer perhaps was trying to return to that with the series and do something maybe with the various houses, as one of you described, but the show got canceled before he could make good on that.

I have to wonder if maybe the change prevented Whistler from killing himself at the end of Blade 1? Perhaps the human side wanted to do it but the vampire self-preservation thing kicked in? And admittedly they didn't do a good job of showing Whistler kick his blood habit or follow up on the seeds of mistrust that were sown.

In hindsight I can see how bringing Whistler back might have ******ed Blade's character growth. If they had followed on with Karen Jenson instead you might have been able to take Blade into a different direction than what we got. However, the focus was on bromance and not romance, on the action at the expense of character. I just wish that Goyer had been able to do with Blade what he later did with Batman.
 
Re: Reboot v. Continuation

I'm cool either way. I'm not one of those people who believe that it must be Wesley or no one. However it would be great if Wesley and Goyer could be involved in a reboot in some capacity.
 
the 3rd movie should have be the apocolyse idea the humans all in concentration camps by the vampires.blade not seen in 10yrs then comes out of nowhere as a missiah.goyer picked the wrong version to make blade trinity.
 
Can't it be a bit of both?

I'd like something that can be seen as within the previous series, but with a slightly new take.

A bit like First Class did for X-Men - it disregarded what didn't work, filled in 'gaps' and started its own series.

Doesn't have to be a prequel necessarily, but I think this strategy might work. Complete reboots starting from scratch with origins are getting a little tiresome.
 
How about having this guy take the role?

Idris-Elba.jpg
 
Hellion,

I still disagree with you about Parker Posey. I just felt she was too offbeat and not threatening enough, though to her credit she did have one really good scene where she tortured Hannibal about his thirst eventually overtaking him and him feeding on the little girl they kidnapped. But other than that, her crew was too lightweight.

Though I think you made a good point about Abigail. She wasn't that impressive to me to be honest. I also thought the movie was too murky when it came to whether vampires had been outed or not. The first two films at least were consistent in largely keeping vampires hidden from the general public. But with Trinity it seemed like that had broken down and that vamps were more public. Which seemed like it wouldn't make what Blade was doing all that big of a deal (though I know that the vamps also had control over law enforcement, to some extent). I wish the film had been more clear about how much people knew about vampires.

Regarding Grout and Blue Moon's comments about Blade 2. I have to admit you both had some good points. I was so taken with Blade 2 as I first saw it, it was such a rush that I was willing to overlook some of its faults. But I do wish that they had brought Karen Jenson back and I think that Blade's lack of development really hurt him in the long run because it opened the door for him to be upstaged by more 'interesting' characters like Hannibal & Abigail in Trinity and then Krista in the TV show.

I wish there had been more focus on his emotional journey and what little we got I credit that to Snipes. Because we saw what little Goyer thought of the character's journey largely without Snipes in the TV series.

Though the movies took Blade to another level, I must admit that I think the old 70's comics did a better job with his character development-from what I've read-and even some of the recent comics have given him a girlfriend, the vamp Spitfire. I don't see why the movies were so against allowing Blade to have a love interest. It's something I think Wesley Snipes wanted, because I think he understood how important that could be to the character's overall development and viability.

Back to Blade 2, I do wish it had followed on more from the first film, with Jenson, but also with the vampire politics. I do think that Goyer perhaps was trying to return to that with the series and do something maybe with the various houses, as one of you described, but the show got canceled before he could make good on that.

I have to wonder if maybe the change prevented Whistler from killing himself at the end of Blade 1? Perhaps the human side wanted to do it but the vampire self-preservation thing kicked in? And admittedly they didn't do a good job of showing Whistler kick his blood habit or follow up on the seeds of mistrust that were sown.

In hindsight I can see how bringing Whistler back might have ******ed Blade's character growth. If they had followed on with Karen Jenson instead you might have been able to take Blade into a different direction than what we got. However, the focus was on bromance and not romance, on the action at the expense of character. I just wish that Goyer had been able to do with Blade what he later did with Batman.

Nice read! I think the common denominator we can all probably agree on is Blade 1.. Therefore I stick to the guns of giving it back to Norrington. I think we would all agree that would be exciting. Just cant see a reboot when they got it right the 1st time, it just drifted once it left Norrington. Im not a Norrington nut hugger either, i just think he nailed it with Blade.

P.S. Even if Whistler turned he still shot himself with Blades gun, silver.. he's dead either way.. he's dead i tell yoooouuu! lol
 
Last edited:
the 3rd movie should have be the apocolyse idea the humans all in concentration camps by the vampires.blade not seen in 10yrs then comes out of nowhere as a missiah.goyer picked the wrong version to make blade trinity.

Whatever the crimes of Blade Trinity, its far better than this concept. Seriously, stop and think for a second how you could possibly make this make sense.
 
Grout,

I was thinking if the vampire side was taking Whistler over, he might have fired the shot but it doesn't mean he shot himself.

Metaphysician,

Actually I like the futuristic doomsday idea that was scrapped in favor of Trinity. I think Daybreakers pulled it off well enough, but I can only imagine how Blade really could've rocked that concept.
 
Grout,

I was thinking if the vampire side was taking Whistler over, he might have fired the shot but it doesn't mean he shot himself.

Metaphysician,

Actually I like the futuristic doomsday idea that was scrapped in favor of Trinity. I think Daybreakers pulled it off well enough, but I can only imagine how Blade really could've rocked that concept.

Yeah i suppose it's open to debate (Whistler).. but i think the movie presented every intention that he shot himself. It really showed everything other then him actually blowing his head off, but then there really is no reason to film a scene like that.

Actualy why Im thinking about it, does anybody know why Norrington did not come back for any sequels? I never really looked into it, or have heard anything as to why.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Grout,

I was thinking if the vampire side was taking Whistler over, he might have fired the shot but it doesn't mean he shot himself.

Metaphysician,

Actually I like the futuristic doomsday idea that was scrapped in favor of Trinity. I think Daybreakers pulled it off well enough, but I can only imagine how Blade really could've rocked that concept.

The problem is, the first two movies establish a world in which this is impossibly unlikely. Unless the vampires unleashed an actual doom plague that killed 90% of humanity, there is no way for them to conquer the world. They don't have the resources or the numbers, and thus have to hide.
 
^
I'm not sure about the reasoning for your conclusions. I can assume that their numbers are small based on their need to stay hidden and work through a lot of human familiars, but that says to me that they do have resources, enough to buy the silence and/or cooperation of many powerful humans.

And also, the first film established the idea of the Blood God that could instantly turn anyone that it came into contact with, which could have wiped out a substantial number of humans. And I don't think it's too out of bounds to think of vampires developing some kind of doomsday plague. The two films did show that the vamps are obsessed with genetics, especially Damaskinos, and that they wanted to find a cure to sunlight.

Looking at Trinity, Goyer did bring in the idea of the blood farms, tying it back to the first film, so it can be safe to assume that they blood farms existed probably in the first film and in the second, as part of the vamps preparing for the Blood God. Since Blade had destroyed him, why did they keep the farms going? Where they planning some other kind of apocalypse?
 
Okay, let me rephrase it: the vampires show nothing even approaching the numbers or resource base the conquer a major first world country. Doing such requires a *lot* of resources. Political corruption can only go so far, especially when you have to keep yourselves totally secret.

Could they make a doom plague and bring down civilization? Sure, they could try that. But if it worked, and they ruled the ruins, that would not be "conquering the world." That would be "destroying the world and ruling the wreckage."
 
I still dont understand why each sequel went for the doomsday approach right off the bat. Blade is one of the few movies that I would not mind seeing a prequel. Give it to Norrington, cast a younger version of blade + whistler story. It could be like a Batman Begins in the sense of how it came to be. I wouldnt mind that,, and I hate prequels..

Although ultimatley I would like Norrington to get back with Snipes and keep going where Blade 1 left. Hell the sequels could almost be "one offs" and I dont think people would really care, the sequels botched the story line from Blade 1 anyways.

P.S. I watched Blade 2 the other day,, was it just me or is the girl that played "Nyssa" horrible in that film. Bad acting IMO
 
Last edited:
Okay, let me rephrase it: the vampires show nothing even approaching the numbers or resource base the conquer a major first world country. Doing such requires a *lot* of resources. Political corruption can only go so far, especially when you have to keep yourselves totally secret.

Could they make a doom plague and bring down civilization? Sure, they could try that. But if it worked, and they ruled the ruins, that would not be "conquering the world." That would be "destroying the world and ruling the wreckage."

Destroying the world and ruling the wreckage sounds a lot like conquering to me, IMO. As for the doomsday idea, it was supposed to take place sometime in the future, so the rise of the vampires, I'm assuming, wasn't supposed to be an overnight thing. So who is to say how they would acquire enough power to take over humanity?

I do think it could've set the franchise on an interesting course and provided Blade with a challenge beyond the eventual showdown with the big bad like every film did.
 
I still dont understand why each sequel went for the doomsday approach right off the bat. Blade is one of the few movies that I would not mind seeing a prequel. Give it to Norrington, cast a younger version of blade + whistler story. It could be like a Batman Begins in the sense of how it came to be. I wouldnt mind that,, and I hate prequels..

Although ultimatley I would like Norrington to get back with Snipes and keep going where Blade 1 left. Hell the sequels could almost be "one offs" and I dont think people would really care, the sequels botched the story line from Blade 1 anyways.

P.S. I watched Blade 2 the other day,, was it just me or is the girl that played "Nyssa" horrible in that film. Bad acting IMO

Looking back, I wish that the TV series had been a prequel. I think that approach would've been less forgiving on Kirk Jones's portrayal of Blade.

I didn't have a problem with Nyssa. It didn't appear that the character was meant to be well developed, though I thought the actress who played her was very fine. I also thought there was a little chemistry between her and Snipes. It's just that the film didn't do much with it. I liked that she challenged him-not as well as Karen Jenson did in the first film-but still she got him to think about things a little differently. She helped prick his mindset, helped with his development.

With Trinity, there was no character that really did that. And once Whistler was gone, he didn't have much of an emotional anchor. I guess there was attempts at levity or a cop-buddy kind of thing with Hannibal, but where I think the film dropped the ball yet again was developing a stronger mentor-relationship between Blade and Abigail. Taking on a parenting kind of role, in place of Whistler, could've been an interesting take on the character.

I think the TV show tried to do something like that, with Blade and Krista, but that wasn't well developed either.
 
Dude yessss!!!!! I dont think theres much hope of us seeing Morbius in a Spider Man film any time soon. And David Goyer had planned on using Morbius in Blade 2, they even filmed a scene with him in it. soooo cool :D

But yes, that is a great idea. We need a new Blade movie what a great character. I wouldnt be opposed to bringing Snipes back as he popularized the character, but Id also like to see a new take, hes already been Blade 3 times...Lets get a new guy.
 
How about having this guy take the role?

Idris-Elba.jpg

I dont think anyone would be opposed to this . Hes a great actor but I dont see it happening with Marvel Studios owning both Blade and Thor, which he starred in as Heimdall. In the next THor movie his role is said to have been expanded
 
If they did cast Elba, I would be forced to WMG that Blade's powers don't come from vampirism at all, though his unfortunate thirst does if they keep it. Rather. . . well, see, even the Guardian of Asgard gets leave time occasionally, and he met this mortal woman, and one thing led to another. . . ;)
 
From what I've heard, Wesley Snipes didn't really pull his weight on the filming of Blade Trinity, and a lot of it was his body-double. But hey, internet is full of ********, and it doesn't really sound right considering how much effort Snipes put into the role previously - honestly, he made Blade 1 and 2, which are still some of my favourite movies.

I wouldn't mind seeing him return to the role in a fourth Blade film - I'm not really a fan of reboots, but it is quite easy to simply base the film enough years in the future that the previous movies don't need to be too heavily referenced. I think that'd be the best move, personally.
 
From what I've heard, Wesley Snipes didn't really pull his weight on the filming of Blade Trinity, and a lot of it was his body-double. But hey, internet is full of ********, and it doesn't really sound right considering how much effort Snipes put into the role previously - honestly, he made Blade 1 and 2, which are still some of my favourite movies.

I wouldn't mind seeing him return to the role in a fourth Blade film - I'm not really a fan of reboots, but it is quite easy to simply base the film enough years in the future that the previous movies don't need to be too heavily referenced. I think that'd be the best move, personally.

I hear ya man, im not a fan of reboots either... But im a minority in my views.. I liked Batman Begins (reboot) I was not a fan of the sequels that followed.

I remember hearing somewhat of a stink wih Blade trinity/ wesley snipes as well. I think he wanted to go more towards the blade 1 storyline. It always seems that when helping "partners" are brought in after the sole hero has been established,, it just kinda goes downhill. Maybe its me but Blade always seemed he could handle himself without the help... I know the comics are different..

Another idea is to put him wayyyy in the future and show him kiliing vamps with a wheelchair. lol,,,, I would watch it! But i just dont think a reboot could ever top Blade 1. never say never, but I cant see it.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"