The Spirit: The Movie Visual Companion

[theMan-Bat]

The Spirit: The Movie Visual Companion book by Mark Cotta Vaz, published by Titan Books. Released on November 25th.

$22.50 at Barnes & Noble. http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Spirit/Marc-Cotta-Vaz/e/9781845768324


Making the leap from page to screen, The Spirit hits movie theaters everywhere December 25th, Christmas Day. Discover how Sin City creator Frank Miller is bridging the gap once again between comic book and celluloid in this striking visual companion. Featuring an exclusive introduction by Miller himself, The Spirit: The Movie Visual Companion contains interviews with the cast and crew, color gallery photos and behind-the-scenes shots, production art, the screenplay and lots of Frank Miller storyboards and sketches.

MARK COTTA VAZ INTERVIEW

Titan Books: For those unfamiliar with the character and story, how would you describe The Spirit?

Mark Cotta Vaz: The Spirit was born in 1940 as the lead feature of a syndicated Sunday newspaper comic book insert. Will Eisner, the artist/writer, had been intrigued by a true account of someone who seemingly died of a heart attack but had awakened. In The Spirit origin story, Central City private detective Denny Colt attempts to arrest the criminal scientist Dr. Cobra in his underground lab but is doused with a strange chemical that puts him in a state of suspended animation. Colt is found, apparently dead, and is buried in lonely Wildwood Cemetery. Colt awakens and busts out of his grave. As an officially “dead” man, Colt decides to fight crime as the Spirit, operating out of a crypt in Wildwood Cemetery and assisted by a few operatives (notably Ebony, an African American kid sidekick), and the cooperation of Police Commissioner Dolan. That’s the basic origin. But the Spirit is a unique comics hero, one who has endured despite the original run having ended way back in 1952 (other than original cover art for reprint collections, a limited edition portfolio published in 1977, and other endeavors, Eisner never returned to fulltime Spirit storytelling). The Spirit was a reluctant costumed hero, Eisner only gave his crimefighter a simple domino mask and gloves because his publisher wanted the character to at least resemble the new breed of comic book crimefighters. The Spirit had no super power and Eisner refused to use the character’s strange origins to imbue him with any supernatural qualities. The Spirit was a working class hero who couldn’t afford a Spirit mobile or any of the fancy gizmos or gadgets favored by his crimefighting colleagues. But what truly sets The Spirit apart is Eisner’s cinematic storytelling, a cast of characters that includes a bevy of beautiful women, and a unique mix of adventure, mystery, and romance.

Have you read any of the original Spirit comic books?

As a kid, I was introduced to The Spirit in Jules Feiffer’s classic book, The Great Comic Book Heroes. The 1941 Spirit tale reprinted in Feiffer’s book is a perfect example of what made the series unique, beginning with the dramatic title design showing the letters S-P-I-R-I-T rising like the gates of Damascus, the setting for an exotic adventure as the Spirit comes in search of an expatriate doctor with a secret antidote capable of saving citizens of Central City who are dying of a strange disease—if a strange curse doesn’t kill the embittered doctor first. At the 2006 Comic Con International gathering in San Diego, during which director Frank Miller first appeared on a Spirit movie panel, I found an original copy of that Spirit tale reprinted in the Feiffer book (originally published Sunday, July 20, 1941 in the Philadelphia Record). I actually ran into Miller as he was leaving his hotel and showed him my treasure. Miller grinned and said, “Cool!” It was a Total Fan Boy moment.

What similarities and differences do you see between Will Eisner’s original character and Frank Miller’s version of The Spirit?

Miller’s Spirit screenplay perfectly captured the laconic, romantic, quirky, physical nature of Eisner’s hero. During filming, Miller took pains to make his actors emulate the physical mannerisms of their respective comics-based characters, while the production design emulated the look and atmosphere of Eisner’s Central City. Not a slavish imitation, producer Deborah Del Prete best described the film as “a tribute, yet uniquely its own thing.” Miller also brought his signature style to the production, a hard-boiled vision with a raw energy and dark humor that fleshed out the values, and filled in the blanks, of Eisner’s Spirit mythology. Miller’s major improvement on Eisner’s character was bringing out the dramatic dimensions and possibilities of a character who seemingly dies and is reborn.

What is your reaction to the visual style of the movie?

The production took its inspiration from Sin City, a greenscreen production that famously took the so-called “comic book movie” to a new level. What I found amazing was The Spirit emulates a graphic minimalism that Eisner and other artists have employed in their work, a subtle staging where characters are surrounded by nothing or spotlit in dramatic lighting, backgrounds consist of only a splash of color, a swirl of shadows, or a suggestion of physical detail. The attempt to adapt this visual language from the comics is what sets this movie apart, in my opinion.

How do you feel about the casting for the movie?

Director Frank Miller and producer Deborah Del Prete decided not to cast a “name” actor as the Spirit, and the decision paid off with Gabriel Macht, who captures the Spirit’s physical and quirky qualities. The most inspired piece of casting was Samuel L. Jackson as the Spirit’s classic nemesis, the Octopus. Eisner’s villain was a figure, literally, of the shadows, only seen in glimpses, usually of his gloved hands—Jackson had to bring to life a character that was a “cipher”, as Miller put it.

What can fans expect to find in the “making of” book?

This book chronicles not only the making of the movie, but the historic nature of the production. This is a movie based on a character from the Golden Age of Comics and links Eisner and Miller, both major figures in comics history, and thus allowed for an overview of the evolution of comic books and comic book movies. The Spirit movie is a virtual Rosetta Stone of American popular culture.

How much access were you granted to the production?

Unfortunately, when I came onto the project, principal photography had wrapped. That said, I was given all relevant production materials (such as the screenplay), access to production principals for exclusive interviews (Frank Miller, the producers, director of photography Bill Pope, the major production department heads), and I had access to “the Bunker”, as The Orphanage visual effects team called its Spirit production offices (literally a bunker, their offices located in a former military barracks at San Francisco’s Presidio).


http://comiccon.titanbooks.com/spirit/

 

[IDrawDeadPeople]

MARK COTTA VAZ INTERVIEW

Titan Books: For those unfamiliar with the character and story, how would you describe The Spirit?

Mark Cotta Vaz: The Spirit was born in 1940 as the lead feature of a syndicated Sunday newspaper comic book insert. Will Eisner, the artist/writer, had been intrigued by a true account of someone who seemingly died of a heart attack but had awakened. In The Spirit origin story, Central City private detective Denny Colt attempts to arrest the criminal scientist Dr. Cobra in his underground lab but is doused with a strange chemical that puts him in a state of suspended animation. Colt is found, apparently dead, and is buried in lonely Wildwood Cemetery. Colt awakens and busts out of his grave. As an officially “dead” man, Colt decides to fight crime as the Spirit, operating out of a crypt in Wildwood Cemetery and assisted by a few operatives (notably Ebony, an African American kid sidekick), and the cooperation of Police Commissioner Dolan. That’s the basic origin. But the Spirit is a unique comics hero, one who has endured despite the original run having ended way back in 1952 (other than original cover art for reprint collections, a limited edition portfolio published in 1977, and other endeavors, Eisner never returned to fulltime Spirit storytelling). The Spirit was a reluctant costumed hero, Eisner only gave his crimefighter a simple domino mask and gloves because his publisher wanted the character to at least resemble the new breed of comic book crimefighters. The Spirit had no super power and Eisner refused to use the character’s strange origins to imbue him with any supernatural qualities. The Spirit was a working class hero who couldn’t afford a Spirit mobile or any of the fancy gizmos or gadgets favored by his crimefighting colleagues. But what truly sets The Spirit apart is Eisner’s cinematic storytelling, a cast of characters that includes a bevy of beautiful women, and a unique mix of adventure, mystery, and romance.


/

Good grief... even the film's hired BIOGRAPHER knows more about Eisner's work and understands the character better than Miller.


"But what truly sets The Spirit apart is Eisner’s cinematic storytelling, a cast of characters that includes a bevy of beautiful women, and a unique mix of adventure, mystery, and romance."

Apparently, this guy DIDN'T know about how the Spirit has "a dark side" and can be a very "angry man", though. Unless, of course, Miller made THAT up to fit into his one size fits all mold, too.

 

[theMan-Bat]

The film obviously takes liberties with the source material, much to purists chagrin, yet it captures the essence of Will Eisner's Spirit.

The film is a cinematic action-adventure-romance with a cast of characters that includes a bevy of beautiful women, noir, expressionism, using devices like snow, a Christmas setting, as an emotional connection with the audience - what Harvey Kurtzman called ''Eisner-spritz,'' and very sparse use of color, it's mostly black and white. Eisner perfered The Spirit in black and white. Eisner said, “I prefer The Spirit in black and white — I prefer all of my work in black and white, to be honest with you. I believe the black line is a more pure contact with the reader. Color tends to obliterate or interfere with the flow of the story. I try very hard to make emotional contact with my reader early and to maintain an intense relationship as the story goes on. I find that anything that interferes with that is counterproductive.” (From Comic Book Artist, in an article by Jon B. Cooke)
http://comicfoundry.com/?p=820

The Spirit did have a dark side to it and The Spirit could be an angry man at times, and Frank Miller understands that he wasn't angry all the time. Gabriel Macht was cast because he captured the likeable tongue-in-cheek, wry humor of the character, and the clumsy awkwardness. The Spirit was less smooth than most detectives. Gabriel Macht explained, "There was a certain humor I brought to the character that they really liked. One thing we did was, we were talking about how the Spirit is physically very strong and can obviously take care of himself. He finds ways to protect himself and civilians in Central City. He'll use a manhole cover as a shield or something. He hates guns. But there's also the sense of the Spirit being sort of clumsy. He may walk into a wall or whatever. I was talking with Frank once, and he was telling me about how he wanted this punch to look—he was hoping for the Spirit to really look like he knew what he was doing, and this punch was a deadly hit, right? So when he reached back to show me the punch, he actually hit himself in the nose. [Laughs] It was hilarious, because it was exactly what the Spirit would have done. It was just a perfect image, a metaphor for who the Spirit is."

 

[mego joe]

The film obviously takes liberties with the source material, much to purists chagrin, yet it captures the essence of Will Eisner's Spirit.

With Miller's Spirit having a super healing factor I think it's safe to safe to say it's almost completely different from Eisner's stuff. This is a huge difference in essence. You've changed something essential to what makes Eisner's Spirit the Spirit.

And any fan of comics should be appalled at something so ridiculous as super-healing power for this character. It would be like giving Batman the ability to fly. It's just not apart of he character and changes something essential. Once Denny has this healing power it completely changes the character.

Hey, at least you've come around to seeing that this film features tons of changes and is more about Miller than Eisner.

 

[theMan-Bat]

With Miller's Spirit having a super healing factor I think it's safe to safe to say it's almost completely different from Eisner's stuff. This is a huge difference in essence. You've changed something essential to what makes Eisner's Spirit the Spirit.

And any fan of comics should be appalled at something so ridiculous as super-healing power for this character. It would be like giving Batman the ability to fly. It's just not apart of he character and changes something essential. Once Denny has this healing power it completely changes the character.

Frank Miller explains, “He’s not a superhero. He can’t fly, he can’t throw cars around. But he has this one extraordinary quality: he can take ridiculous amounts of punishment, and heal faster than anybody.”

The Spirit had this one extraordinary quality in the Will Eisner comics, too. He could take ridiculous amounts of punishment which would kill a normal person. From "Sign of the Octopus," 10 August 1947 for example, we see him beaten in the head with a crowbar by the Octopus and blood pouring out of his skull.

Then not dieing and healing faster than anybody. A normal person would have died due to head trauma.

As Jules Feiffer wrote it in his 1965 book The Great Comic Book Heroes, "Much of the Spirit's charm lay in his response to intense physical punishment. Hoodlums could slug him, shoot him, bend pipes over his head. The Spirit merely stuck his tongue in his cheek and beat the crap out of them."

Hey, at least you've come around to seeing that this film features tons of changes and is more about Miller than Eisner.

I've never said the film didn't feature changes, and I've always said it will be a mix of Eisner and Miller, since Eisner created the characters and the original stories and Miller wrote the screenplay, picked the cast, storyboarded and directed the film.

 

[mego joe]

Frank Miller explains, “He’s not a superhero. He can’t fly, he can’t throw cars around. But he has this one extraordinary quality: he can take ridiculous amounts of punishment, and heal faster than anybody.”

The Spirit had this one extraordinary quality in the Will Eisner comics, too. He could take ridiculous amounts of punishment which would kill a normal person. From "Sign of the Octopus," 10 August 1947 for example, we see him beaten in the head with a crowbar by the Octopus and blood pouring out of his skull.

Then not dieing and healing faster than anybody. A normal person would have died due to head trauma.

As Jules Feiffer wrote it in his 1965 book The Great Comic Book Heroes, "Much of the Spirit's charm lay in his response to intense physical punishment. Hoodlums could slug him, shoot him, bend pipes over his head. The Spirit merely stuck his tongue in his cheek and beat the crap out of them."



I've never said the film didn't feature changes, and I've always said it will be a mix of Eisner and Miller, since Eisner created the characters and the original stories and Miller wrote the screenplay, picked the cast, storyboarded and directed the film.

Sorry Man-Bat, it's just not the same thing. In the comics he doesn't heal extraordinarily fast. The Spirit walked around on crutches, had arms in slings- he doesn't heal overnight from gunshot wounds like does in the trailer. Miller just needed a stupid reason to explain something that doesn't need explanation and to change the character unecessarily- just like the costume from blue to black. The only reason it's not blue in the film is b/c Miller is limited in his storytelling. Plain and simple.

 

[mego joe]

Frank Miller explains, “He’s not a superhero. He can’t fly, he can’t throw cars around. But he has this one extraordinary quality: he can take ridiculous amounts of punishment, and heal faster than anybody.”

The Spirit had this one extraordinary quality in the Will Eisner comics, too. He could take ridiculous amounts of punishment which would kill a normal person. From "Sign of the Octopus," 10 August 1947 for example, we see him beaten in the head with a crowbar by the Octopus and blood pouring out of his skull.

Then not dieing and healing faster than anybody. A normal person would have died due to head trauma.

If you look closely at the above image you will notice that the Octopus is hitting the Spirit with a walking cane, not a crowbar. You can even see the rubber end of it which would come in contact with the floor to prevent slippage. So I don't think it would require extaordinary powers to "not die" after being hit by a walking cane or "heal faster than anybody."

If you bothered to read the story description on the page you lifted these images from you would have realized that the SPirit is drug off by the Octopus and is held captive until Klink(a Central City Cop) finds him and releases him from the Octopus.

http://www.angelfire.com/art/wildwood/showdown.html

Perhaps then you would have also realized that the picture below is from a separate story published over a month later and that his blindness
was cured after receiving medical attention and from a freak accident of an expolosion and exposure to a chemical. You also failed to note that there is a whole story called 'Blind' in which the Spirit is blinded and remains blind until the end of the story published two weeks later. Of course you would actually have to have read these stories to know what happened and understand that the three or four images on that page are not all from the same story. The larger story the website is outlining takes place over six different stories published consecutively six weeks in a row.


Sorry Man- Bat, but you're just wrong. There is no superhealing in the Spirit comics, even in the images you misinterpretted. Miller made it up plain and simple.

 

[Octoberist]

I really was turned off by the line "I'm gonna kill you all kinds of dead". Not so much for the line itself, but it feels like out of character for The Spirit to say such things.

First, I don't know if he wouldn't wanna threaten someone like that. Secondly, I don't know if he would be so showy about how he kills him either.

My point being is that, yes, there will be difference when you're adapting a project like this into a movie. But I'm not getting the right vibe that I got from..let's say Iron Man or Dark Knight. Something doesn't feel right.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Sorry Man-Bat, it's just not the same thing. In the comics he doesn't heal extraordinarily fast. The Spirit walked around on crutches, had arms in slings- he doesn't heal overnight from gunshot wounds like does in the trailer. Miller just needed a stupid reason to explain something that doesn't need explanation and to change the character unecessarily- just like the costume from blue to black. The only reason it's not blue in the film is b/c Miller is limited in his storytelling. Plain and simple.

He took ridiculous amounts of punishment. How could anyone possibly say if he's using crutches at some point in the film or not, since none of us has seen Miller's film yet? We do see him apparently needing Ellen to help him get up and walk in the trailer after he's been shot and beaten. The incredible endurance explanation explains how the Spirit could take such intense physical punishment and not die or suffer from permanent injuries. The reason it needed an explanation is because the general movie-going audience would have wondered, and it also gives Miller a chance to do more with the character. The reason his clothes are not blue is simple - the black outfit looks better. It gives it that additional flair and makes it appealing for the masses. The general movie-going audience is the most important part. Fans of the old Eisner Spirit comics and the DC Cooke Spirit comics alone wouldn't fill good-sized multiplex's. What's this you say? "The only reason it's not blue in the film is b/c Miller is limited in his storytelling? Plain and simple?" You're implying that all Miller's stories are limited to characters dressed in all black outfits? That's just not true. Plain and simple.

 

[theMan-Bat]

If you look closely at the above image you will notice that the Octopus is hitting the Spirit with a walking cane, not a crowbar. You can even see the rubber end of it which would come in contact with the floor to prevent slippage. So I don't think it would require extaordinary powers to "not die" after being hit by a walking cane or "heal faster than anybody."

Whether it's a cane or a crowbar, and on closer look - the color version clarifies - it's indeed a cane, his skull is bleeding profusely.

If you bothered to read the story description on the page you lifted these images from you would have realized that the SPirit is drug off by the Octopus and is held captive until Klink(a Central City Cop) finds him and releases him from the Octopus.

I realize that.

Perhaps then you would have also realized that the picture below is from a separate story published over a month later and that his blindness
was cured after receiving medical attention and from a freak accident of an expolosion and exposure to a chemical. You also failed to note that there is a whole story called 'Blind' in which the Spirit is blinded and remains blind until the end of the story published two weeks later. Of course you would actually have to have read these stories to know what happened and understand that the three or four images on that page are not all from the same story. The larger story the website is outlining takes place over six different stories published consecutively six weeks in a row.

Did I say those images are from the same newspaper strip? No, sir, I didn't. I am aware that they are from a six-part storyline. This story influenced Frank Miller.

Sorry Man- Bat, but you're just wrong. There is no superhealing in the Spirit comics, even in the images you misinterpretted. Miller made it up plain and simple.

He took ridiculous amounts of punishment, Miller expanded upon that.

 

[mego joe]

Whether it's a cane or a crowbar, and on closer look - the color version clarifies - it's indeed a cane, his skull is bleeding profusely.

I realize that.

Did I say those images are from the same newspaper strip? No, sir, I didn't. I am aware that they are from a six-part storyline. This story influenced Frank Miller.



He took ridiculous amounts of punishment, Miller expanded upon that.

And he didn't get up and walk away and was just fine the next day.


The imortant things we know from the trailer is that in Miller's film he recovers from gunshot wounds overnight. THis requires Miller's healing factor. In the comics he is shown overtime recovering from wounds- he doesn't heal overnight, he simply doesn't. Like a real person he takes time. Miller's film has made him superhuman in this regard. Something he's clearly not in the comics. Why? B/c Miller has no respect for the material. He's admitted he's changing stuff b/c he wants to.

 

[mego joe]

He took ridiculous amounts of punishment. How could anyone possibly say if he's using crutches at some point in the film or not, since none of us has seen Miller's film yet? We do see him apparently needing Ellen to help him get up and walk in the trailer after he's been shot and beaten. The incredible endurance explanation explains how the Spirit could take such intense physical punishment and not die or suffer from permanent injuries. The reason it needed an explanation is because the general movie-going audience would have wondered, and it also gives Miller a chance to do more with the character.

THe Spirit has never neeed a reason for either his endurance OR his attractiveness to women. It's simply not needed. THe action in the Spirit film is cartoony Wile E Cyote violence- that's not what the Spirit comics have. Miller changed that as well. And created a need for an explanation.

And if you mean by "do(ing) more with the character" you mean changing the substanace of the character- then yes you're right. Changing it for the worse I might add.

The reason his clothes are not blue is simple - the black outfit looks better.

Afraid you'r wrong there. It doesn't even look like the Spirit. HOwever, it may look better to Mille b/c of his limited storytelling approach. That could be true.

It gives it that additional flair and makes it appealing for the masses. The general movie-going audience is the most important part. Fans of the old Eisner Spirit comics and the DC Cooke Spirit comics alone wouldn't fill good-sized multiplex's.

Done properly it could. Miller's just isn't the right person to make a great Spirit film that is faithful to the comics.

What's this you say? "The only reason it's not blue in the film is b/c Miller is limited in his storytelling? Plain and simple?" You're implying that all Miller's stories are limited to characters dressed in all black outfits? That's just not true. Plain and simple.

It is. Miller can't do a SPirit film that is faithful- otherwise he would have. He wanted to change the color so it would fit into HIS mould of storytelling. Plain and simple. I'm not implying that he only tells stories w/ people in all black outfits. WHat I'm saying is that he changes things to fit HIS mould as opposed to doing what's best for the character.

 

[theMan-Bat]

And he didn't get up and walk away and was just fine the next day.


The imortant things we know from the trailer is that in Miller's film he recovers from gunshot wounds overnight. THis requires Miller's healing factor. In the comics he is shown overtime recovering from wounds- he doesn't heal overnight, he simply doesn't. Like a real person he takes time. Miller's film has made him superhuman in this regard. Something he's clearly not in the comics. Why? B/c Miller has no respect for the material. He's admitted he's changing stuff b/c he wants to.

If we want the Eisner comic version, we can read the comic - the film is, quite rightly, different.

 

[theMan-Bat]

THe Spirit has never neeed a reason for either his endurance OR his attractiveness to women. It's simply not needed. THe action in the Spirit film is cartoony Wile E Cyote violence- that's not what the Spirit comics have. Miller changed that as well. And created a need for an explanation.

And if you mean by "do(ing) more with the character" you mean changing the substanace of the character- then yes you're right. Changing it for the worse I might add.

Afraid you'r wrong there. It doesn't even look like the Spirit. HOwever, it may look better to Mille b/c of his limited storytelling approach. That could be true.

Done properly it could. Miller's just isn't the right person to make a great Spirit film that is faithful to the comics.

It is. Miller can't do a SPirit film that is faithful- otherwise he would have. He wanted to change the color so it would fit into HIS mould of storytelling. Plain and simple. I'm not implying that he only tells stories w/ people in all black outfits. WHat I'm saying is that he changes things to fit HIS mould as opposed to doing what's best for the character.

You are telling me about why The Spirit movie is going to suck because of a list of details that this movie has that are in conflict with details from the comic book: color of clothes, faster healing. My question is "Do they stick to the spirit of the characters," rather than making sure they are slavishly faithful. Really, the bottom line for me is "does the character work in the movie or not," not "how perfectly does the character match the comic character." Macht's Spirit needed to be adapted for the story and world that Miller has created. Miller’s interpretation of the character. Sam Jones' Spirit simply would not have fit with Miller's Spirit take. He would have come off as too silly and ridiculous in this setting. To really nail the spirit of The Spirit in the context of Miller's take, those changes needed to be made… and I think once we see the film most of us will agree the changes were for the best and worked perfectly.

I doubt you, 3 Div Adam, Mercurius, IDrawDeadPeople, Bubastis and some others will agree, but you guys say you refuse to see Miller's film in theaters anyway because this is Miller's own interpretation, he's own take.

Which is the way Will Eisner wanted Miller to do The Spirit, to do his own interpretation, he's own take, not try to be Will Eisner...

CHRISTOPHER IRVING: What made you decide to let others do The Spirit, after about fifty years of doing the series yourself?

WILL EISNER: The answer has to be a little complicated. For years, Denis Kitchen has been after me, pushing and prodding for me to do another Spirit story. I was never interested in doing it, because my plate is too full with new material that I feel necessary to do. Finally, I agreed to allow him to do a Spirit story, provided he would get some top people in the field to do it. The only condition that I made was that they would not try to be Will Eisner, because every attempt I have ever seen of continuing a strip, like Caniff's Terry and The Pirates, were a failure. It would be a failure I reasoned if they were to attempt to be [SIZE=+1][/SIZE]Will Eisner. I said if they were willing to do a series of stories based on their own interpretation and their own take, I would be willing to allow it. Frank Miller has agreed to do one. [SIZE=+1][/SIZE]

About Schultz' TV movie http://www.sell.com/22NC4G which has the blue suit and Ebony White (renamed Eubie) and full color, Will Eisner said...

EISNER: The television movie left me feeling very sorry for Warner Bros., I felt sad for them. I sent them a condolence note because they spent all this money and came up with a mouse. And I don't mean M-A-U-S. [laughs] Filmmakers very often don't really, I think, understand the fact that a cartoon strip, cartoon story, or even a book, has a characteristic of its own that, to adapt it into film, requires a great deal of creative application. There are some comics that lend themselves easily...Batman [and] Superman lend themselves easily because they're both circus characters, and circus is very easy to film. But when you try to take something like The Shadow, or even Dick Tracy, both were failures at the box-office.
Warner Bros. made a very honest attempt to be faithful to the character of The Spirit, and that was a mistake. [laughs] But, I must again emphasise that, personally, I couldn't care less about film. I'm not interested in film. I wouldn't be worried about whatever they did with the character because it doesn't really matter.


EISNER: Frankly, I'm very unconcerned about a movie. I was sorry for them, because I felt that they had turned out kind of a bland piece of work and spent about a million and a half dollars doing this pilot. I felt that they made an uninspired movie, and it didn't surprise me that it was a failure and didn't catch on. I have a very indifferent feeling about film.

[SIZE=+1][/SIZE]To Micheal Uslan Will Eisner said, "Don't limit yourself to what I did in 1940 or 1950. Make it relevant for today and for the needs of movie going audiences of today. These are things you need to do and you shouldn't be tied to something because it was in the 11th issue."

MIKE JOZIC: The Spirit has been around for a very long time and he seems to be one of the few costume characters that hasn't succumbed to various, and sundry, film adaptations.
EISNER: Not yet, anyway. He's at the threshold of succumbing. [laughs]
JOZIC: Oh, really?
EISNER: Yeah, the people who produced Batman purchased the rights from me about two or three years ago to do a Spirit film. And very candidly, I couldn't care less about film. I'm totally uninterested in film. If they do a good Spirit movie, I won't get the credit for it. If they do a bad one, my status as a writer and a cartoonist, will not be diminished. You will not think any less of me if they put a lousy film out. It's like Shakespeare. There are lousy productions of Shakespeare and there are good ones. It doesn't mitigate the essential character of the man's work.


EISNER: I'm not interested in film, as a medium. I get nothing other than money, I suppose, out of a Spirit movie. It just means very little to me. If it's a success, it's to their credit; if it's a failure, it's their failure, not mine.

http://www.mikejozic.com/eisner_transcript.html

http://www.richmondcomix.com/irving/eisner.html[SIZE=+1] [/SIZE]

So no, Eisner isn't rolling over in his grave over this film.

[SIZE=+1][/SIZE]

 

[mego joe]

You are telling me about why The Spirit movie is going to suck because of a list of details that this movie has that are in conflict with details from the comic book: color of clothes, faster healing. My question is "Do they stick to the spirit of the characters," rather than making sure they are slavishly faithful. Really, the bottom line for me is "does the character work in the movie or not," not "how perfectly does the character match the comic character." Macht's Spirit needed to be adapted for the story and world that Miller has created. Miller’s interpretation of the character. Sam Jones' Spirit simply would not have fit with Miller's Spirit take. He would have come off as too silly and ridiculous in this setting. To really nail the spirit of The Spirit in the context of Miller's take, those changes needed to be made… and I think once we see the film most of us will agree the changes were for the best and worked perfectly.

I doubt you, 3 Div Adam, Mercurius, IDrawDeadPeople, Bubastis and some others will agree, but you guys say you refuse to see Miller's film in theaters anyway because this is Miller's own interpretation, he's own take.

Which is the way Will Eisner wanted Miller to do The Spirit, to do his own interpretation, he's own take, not try to be Will Eisner...

CHRISTOPHER IRVING: What made you decide to let others do The Spirit, after about fifty years of doing the series yourself?

WILL EISNER: The answer has to be a little complicated. For years, Denis Kitchen has been after me, pushing and prodding for me to do another Spirit story. I was never interested in doing it, because my plate is too full with new material that I feel necessary to do. Finally, I agreed to allow him to do a Spirit story, provided he would get some top people in the field to do it. The only condition that I made was that they would not try to be Will Eisner, because every attempt I have ever seen of continuing a strip, like Caniff's Terry and The Pirates, were a failure. It would be a failure I reasoned if they were to attempt to be Will Eisner. I said if they were willing to do a series of stories based on their own interpretation and their own take, I would be willing to allow it. Frank Miller has agreed to do one.

About Schultz' TV movie http://www.sell.com/22NC4G which has the blue suit and Ebony White (renamed Eubie) and full color, Will Eisner said...

EISNER: The television movie left me feeling very sorry for Warner Bros., I felt sad for them. I sent them a condolence note because they spent all this money and came up with a mouse. And I don't mean M-A-U-S. [laughs] Filmmakers very often don't really, I think, understand the fact that a cartoon strip, cartoon story, or even a book, has a characteristic of its own that, to adapt it into film, requires a great deal of creative application. There are some comics that lend themselves easily...Batman [and] Superman lend themselves easily because they're both circus characters, and circus is very easy to film. But when you try to take something like The Shadow, or even Dick Tracy, both were failures at the box-office.
Warner Bros. made a very honest attempt to be faithful to the character of The Spirit, and that was a mistake. [laughs] But, I must again emphasise that, personally, I couldn't care less about film. I'm not interested in film. I wouldn't be worried about whatever they did with the character because it doesn't really matter.


EISNER: Frankly, I'm very unconcerned about a movie. I was sorry for them, because I felt that they had turned out kind of a bland piece of work and spent about a million and a half dollars doing this pilot. I felt that they made an uninspired movie, and it didn't surprise me that it was a failure and didn't catch on. I have a very indifferent feeling about film.

To Micheal Uslan Will Eisner said, "Don't limit yourself to what I did in 1940 or 1950. Make it relevant for today and for the needs of movie going audiences of today. These are things you need to do and you shouldn't be tied to something because it was in the 11th issue."

MIKE JOZIC: The Spirit has been around for a very long time and he seems to be one of the few costume characters that hasn't succumbed to various, and sundry, film adaptations.
EISNER: Not yet, anyway. He's at the threshold of succumbing. [laughs]
JOZIC: Oh, really?
EISNER: Yeah, the people who produced Batman purchased the rights from me about two or three years ago to do a Spirit film. And very candidly, I couldn't care less about film. I'm totally uninterested in film. If they do a good Spirit movie, I won't get the credit for it. If they do a bad one, my status as a writer and a cartoonist, will not be diminished. You will not think any less of me if they put a lousy film out. It's like Shakespeare. There are lousy productions of Shakespeare and there are good ones. It doesn't mitigate the essential character of the man's work.


EISNER: I'm not interested in film, as a medium. I get nothing other than money, I suppose, out of a Spirit movie. It just means very little to me. If it's a success, it's to their credit; if it's a failure, it's their failure, not mine.

http://www.mikejozic.com/eisner_transcript.html

http://www.richmondcomix.com/irving/eisner.html

So no, Eisner isn't rolling over in his grave over this film.

That's right- I have no interest in Miller's version- it's not his character. I am interested in Will Eisner's version, which oddly enough is what matters.

There's a difference between keeping the spirit of the characters and updating things for a modern audience- that's what Darwyn Cooke did in his run.

Giving the Spirit healing powers is fundamentally changing what the characters is about- the over the top Octopus is fundamentally changing what the character is about. It's been said before but Miller's film is the Spirit In Name Only (SPINO). And that is something over which any fan of Eisner should be outraged. If it's not Eisner's Spirit it's not the Spirt. It's a bastardization of Eisner's character.

And sorry nothing appears like it will work "once we see the film most of us will agree the changes were for the best and worked perfectly. "

Goofy Tom and Jerry fighting antics, healing and pheromone powers and a Spirit dressed in all black with horrible Miller dialogue just don't add up to mainting the 'spirit' of the Spirit. Of course unless the thing that is required to be in 'spirit' with the Spirit is names of the characters.


Miller is just the wrong man from the job.

 

[theMan-Bat]

That's right- I have no interest in Miller's version- it's not his character. I am interested in Will Eisner's version, which oddly enough is what matters.

There's a difference between keeping the spirit of the characters and updating things for a modern audience- that's what Darwyn Cooke did in his run.

Giving the Spirit healing powers is fundamentally changing what the characters is about- the over the top Octopus is fundamentally changing what the character is about. It's been said before but Miller's film is the Spirit In Name Only (SPINO). And that is something over which any fan of Eisner should be outraged. If it's not Eisner's Spirit it's not the Spirit. It's a bastardization of Eisner's character.

Will Eisner himself disagreed with "If it's not Eisner's Spirit it's not the Spirit. It's a bastardization of Eisner's character." He wanted Miller to do stories based on his own interpretation and own take. In actual fact, this is Miller's own interpretation of the character. I am tired of all the nerd rage that is surrounding this film. This is Miller’s own interpretation of The Spirit, and I have absolutely no problems with that. I would find it insulting and pathetic if Frank Miller tried to slavishly replicate Will Eisner. Only Eisner could do that, Eisner wasn't interested, and it would be foolish for Miller to try to attempt it. He is doing things right by taking the character and doing his own take on it.

And sorry nothing appears like it will work

That's your opinion, not mine. Of course, if you're old enough to remember the nerd rage about Tim Burton's "Batman," you know it's too early to accurately judge. Odds are that there are going to be a lot of people who’ve never read The Spirit but will love the film.

Goofy Tom and Jerry fighting antics, healing and pheromone powers and a Spirit dressed in all black with horrible Miller dialogue just don't add up to mainting the 'spirit' of the Spirit. Of course unless the thing that is required to be in 'spirit' with the Spirit is names of the characters.

Miller is just the wrong man from the job.

I disagree, and the fighting in Eisner's Spirit comics was cartoonish, humorous, goofy, darkly funny. Eisner's Spirit was often slightly goofy. The humorous dialogue doesn't horrify me - it amuses me, the faster healing doesn't bother me, the acknowledgment of pheromones doesn't bother me, and he looks good in the black outfit. Scarlett Johansson looks extremely good in this film! Sorry but I am excited about this movie. The movie looks hot to me. Period.

 

[IDrawDeadPeople]

The movie looks hot to me. Period.

Well... that certainly explains why every sane, logical, reasonable, fact based argument has flown over your head!

Listen, I can no longer blame you for endlessly denying the reality that no Eisner fans (although I've talked to two purported 'fans' on here who like this reimagining), no Eisner sites, and even Eisner's family estate are not enthusiastic about or supportive of this film.

I kept wondering why you refused to concede even one point of contention regarding this... and finally, it comes out...






... you want to make love to this film!!! Who can argue against lust?

 

[mego joe]

Will Eisner himself disagreed with "If it's not Eisner's Spirit it's not the Spirit. It's a bastardization of Eisner's character." He wanted Miller to do stories based on his own interpretation and own take. In actual fact, this is Miller's own interpretation of the character. I am tired of all the nerd rage that is surrounding this film. This is Miller’s own interpretation of The Spirit, and I have absolutely no problems with that. I would find it insulting and pathetic if Frank Miller tried to slavishly replicate Will Eisner. Only Eisner could do that, Eisner wasn't interested, and it would be foolish for Miller to try to attempt it. He is doing things right by taking the character and doing his own take on it.



That's your opinion, not mine. Of course, if you're old enough to remember the nerd rage about Tim Burton's "Batman," you know it's too early to accurately judge. Odds are that there are going to be a lot of people who’ve never read The Spirit but will love the film.

The only 'nerd rage' I recall was the casting of Michael Keaton. ONce everyone saw that it was a serious and not comedic approach people got excited about it. Unfortunately this is not what's happened with the Spirit. Every time a new image or quote from someone involved comes out there are more concerns raised. ONce the first scenes with Keaton in the cowl came out no one looked back. Everyone is second guessing Miller on the Spirit.

More likely there will be plenty of people who've never read the Spirit that say- "That was stupid, why did they make a movie about that. What's the big deal with the Spirit."

I disagree, and the fighting in Eisner's Spirit comics was cartoonish, humorous, goofy, darkly funny. Eisner's Spirit was often slightly goofy.

Goofy expresssions maybe and some silly looking visuals, but the violence depicted was real- not inconsequential due to 'healing faster than anyone else' and being almost invulnerable. Miller has Tom and Jerry in there.

The humorous dialogue doesn't horrify me - it amuses me, the faster healing doesn't bother me, the acknowledgment of pheromones doesn't bother me, and he looks good in the black outfit. Scarlett Johansson looks extremely good in this film! Sorry but I am excited about this movie. The movie looks hot to me. Period.

The thing about the fighting and healing is that it completely negates the element of danger that Denny Colt put himself through. It's not a serious danger for the Spirit. If he's nearly invulnerable and can heal up overnight it completely changes who the character is. It's simply not the Spirit, it's simply not in the spirit of Eisner's stuff. ANd I don't think Eisner wanted to introduce goofy and stupid things into the SPirit like MIller has. He wanted the character to be updated and not limited to his stories- but I don't think he would ever imagined the Spirit in a fantasy world like Miller has created.

The dialogue is not humorous- it's painful. I can imagine the audience groaning in unison when I hear some of the lines from the film.

The thing that really gets me is that comic book films have been fighting for legitimacy for years- becoming more serious and finally being taken seriously by critics as real fillms. But Miller's Spirit seems to be revisiting the Batman TV show. It's goofy and stupid and painfully funny- b/c the dialogue is so bad. It's not serious. NOw I"m not trying to bash the old Batman TV show, but it was made as camp- that was the point of it. Doing that to the Spirit is exceedingly disappointing. It just doesn't fit with Eisner's world. What Miller's done has kept some superficial elements but changed the substance behind them. That is a huge problem, that's what makes this the SPINO.

It's ok that it looks great to you, everyone has different taste. But this movie is not the Spirit- too much has been changed.


We agree that Scarlett Johanssan looks hot, but that's hardly a reason to watch a film that looks this bad in every other way.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Well... that certainly explains why every sane, logical, reasonable, fact based argument has flown over your head!

Listen, I can no longer blame you for endlessly denying the reality that no Eisner fans (although I've talked to two purported 'fans' on here who like this reimagining), no Eisner sites, and even Eisner's family estate are not enthusiastic about or supportive of this film.

I kept wondering why you refused to concede even one point of contention regarding this... and finally, it comes out...






... you want to make love to this film!!! Who can argue against lust?

Not exactly, but thanks for making me laugh, man.

Your charge that no Eisner fans on Eisner sites are in support of Miller's film is just not accurate.

By Gary Chaloner on willeisner.com ...

Well, I see your point, but in listening to several interviews with Mr. Miller, I'm starting to understand what he's trying to do with this film. Though a lot of old time Eisner Spirit fans may not agree with him, Miller is attempting to continue what Will Eisner was doing with the character while making it appealing to today's cinema goers.

Eisner, in the stories he produced featuring The Spirit after his initial run (1940-1952) firmly planted the seed for an updated, progressive scenario for his Spirit characters. He had his hero interact with hippies in the 70s and other modern types in the few Spirit items he produced in the 80s and 90s. He condoned other writers and artists like Eddie Campbell experimenting with The Spirit in modern times (The Spirit: The New Adventures) and I'm pretty sure if Eisner was to have ever returned to the character for a prolonged period of new stories, he would have placed the character in a milieu not unlike what Darwyn Cooke has devised for the new DC Comics series.

Miller, I think, is just taking a leaf out of this book. Following in Eisner's own footsteps and trying to make a Spirit that is relevant for movie goers today. Movie goers. Not comic readers. For comic readers, there's always The Spirit Archives or the new DC comic by Cooke, Aragones, Evanier, Ploog and Smith.

The new film, rightly or wrongly, has to compete with The Dark Knight with Heath Ledger, Iron Man with Robert Downey Jr. et al... not more eloquent period films like The Green Mile, The Shawshank Redemption... (or even Alec Baldwin's The Shadow). Or lovely old classics like Arsenic and Old Lace, Citizen Kane, His Girl Friday...

I'm confident Miller will get the big bang moments right for the modern movie goer. I'm just hoping the small, quiet moments, the humanity... and the humor... gets done right as well. That'll be the thing that sets this movie apart from Sin City and the other films that have been compared to it so far.

By jugoyan...

Well, if not Frank to do the Spirit, then who? The young kids at D.C. who learned about drawing via computer graphics?
Frank, of anyone alive, definitely, in my opinion, has the cachet and experience, as well of course as the respect, needed for a true homage to "The Spirit"...Frank's over fifty and he's old enough to have been exposed to good old honest paper copies of the Spirit when growing up.
If you think of Batman too much when seeing his mock-ups, it's understandable, really, because of course if you're reading this you've most likely definitely seen and constantly identify Miller with his quintessential "Batman" work...
But along with a potential viewer of Miller's attempt bringing Batman baggage along, to be fair, there's also the gosh darned similarity in the characters. Not Miller's fault at all.
Of course the Spirit lives in a cemetery, under the ground no less...and bat caves are pretty like that, aren't they?
On masks; if the Batman mask is head covering, except for that and the ear points, there's probably very few dark masks in comicdom that come close to the similarity it has with Spirits...There are a few like Green Lanterns, but not in that dark black color...Although come to think of it the Lone Ranger might be spot on, ehh?
Also, look at the way Eisner draws the Spirit...Not Schwartzeneger muscle bound, but definitely built like a Jack Dempsey type...Also, very much like Bruce Wayne...
Wayne's personality of course seems to have none of the wry humor or innate care and expression in it, that we love the Spirit for...But one guy, by himself most of the time...that pretty much fits both of them.
To be honest, the thought of a Spirit movie grates on me a little too...But how else in this day and age of everything movie and computer graphics can we get those under thirty to tune in to the masterpiece of approximately six hundred and fifty stories that is " The Spirit "?
If even one kid puts down his joystick and goes on Ebay to buy a Kitchen Sink magazine or Comic, or a D.C. collected hardback of Spirit...Then in my opinion, we've got converts...
And that's a good thing, not a bad...
When that happens, the movie and attention will be worth it.

By carl ...

Let's listen to what Frank Miller is saying.
His most recent blog entry at http://www.thespiritmovie.com on 5/30 starts out like this:

TO MY READERS
Much has been the fuss in the comics' blogosphere about my SPIRIT movie—much justified, much hoped for, and much to my delight, that there has been a fuss at all. Some comics readers are terrified that THE SPIRIT will be a retread of my SIN CITY. Others quarrel over the change of the SPIRIT'S traditional blue hat, mask, and jacket, to black. These are understandable concerns for any lover of Will Eisner's masterpiece. I take this opportunity to address these concerns. With glee, I take this opportunity.....

First notice Frank's words in the first sentence, "my SPIRIT movie," which is the way that it should be. Then read the whole blog including Frank's 4/30 "eulogy" to his mentor, Will Eisner (also his words). Now sit back and relax (a little) and understand that we're lucky to have Frank Miller and the whole creative team from Odd Lot Entertainment because they understand what they have here, and they care. In Hollywood with all the Bankers, Hedge Funds, and HUGE OUTSIZE EGOs running around, you can't ask for more. And from all indications so far this has a good chance of turning out to be an excellent movie.
Just my opinion,
Carl

By jugyan ...

Amen, let's wait to see the finished product. Despite the previews, bad or good, it's hard to review a movie that isn't completed. I too say, give Frank his chance.

http://willeisner.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=135

 

[theMan-Bat]

The only 'nerd rage' I recall was the casting of Michael Keaton. ONce everyone saw that it was a serious and not comedic approach people got excited about it. Unfortunately this is not what's happened with the Spirit. Every time a new image or quote from someone involved comes out there are more concerns raised. ONce the first scenes with Keaton in the cowl came out no one looked back. Everyone is second guessing Miller on the Spirit.

More likely there will be plenty of people who've never read the Spirit that say- "That was stupid, why did they make a movie about that. What's the big deal with the Spirit."

Hopeful plenty of people will get their moneys worth of entertainment and enjoy the film. I recall the nerd rage about much more than Keaton's casting in '89. Looking back at what was said my '89 fanzines (Comics Scene, Comics Interview, Amazing Heroes): "Keaton's Batman costume looks more like RoboCop's armor than Batman's cloth. Batman's not RoboCop. The Batplane has rocket launchers and machine guns? Batman is going to be using a gun!? Uh-oh, the canon has been violated. Where is Robin? Prince is going to be doing the soundtrack? I thought they would have something like a John Williams soundtrack. The soundtrack should be mysterious background music. Is this going to be a rock soundtrack? I can not believe it's going to be rock singing all though the movie. Jack Nicholson doesn't look like the Joker." And that was just before they saw the film. After, "I waited in line for that? That wasn't anything like the comics. That sucked. Micheal Keaton still doesn't look like Batman. The Joker killing Batman's parents? Alfred letting Vicki Vale into the Batcave? The dialogue 'I've got a flying mouse to kill and I want to clean my claws?' God, I hate that movie. The Joker is not Jack. They should have adapted 'Killing Joke.'" But general audiences loved the movie and didn't nitpick all the deviations from the source material.

Goofy expresssions maybe and some silly looking visuals, but the violence depicted was real- not inconsequential due to 'healing faster than anyone else' and being almost invulnerable. Miller has Tom and Jerry in there.

The thing about the fighting and healing is that it completely negates the element of danger that Denny Colt put himself through. It's not a serious danger for the Spirit. If he's nearly invulnerable and can heal up overnight it completely changes who the character is. It's simply not the Spirit, it's simply not in the spirit of Eisner's stuff. ANd I don't think Eisner wanted to introduce goofy and stupid things into the SPirit like MIller has. He wanted the character to be updated and not limited to his stories- but I don't think he would ever imagined the Spirit in a fantasy world like Miller has created.

The dialogue is not humorous- it's painful. I can imagine the audience groaning in unison when I hear some of the lines from the film.

The thing that really gets me is that comic book films have been fighting for legitimacy for years- becoming more serious and finally being taken seriously by critics as real fillms. But Miller's Spirit seems to be revisiting the Batman TV show. It's goofy and stupid and painfully funny- b/c the dialogue is so bad. It's not serious. NOw I"m not trying to bash the old Batman TV show, but it was made as camp- that was the point of it. Doing that to the Spirit is exceedingly disappointing. It just doesn't fit with Eisner's world. What Miller's done has kept some superficial elements but changed the substance behind them. That is a huge problem, that's what makes this the SPINO.

It's ok that it looks great to you, everyone has different taste. But this movie is not the Spirit- too much has been changed.

The film obviously takes liberties with the source material. It's Miller's version of the Spirit. It's Miller's own interpretation, he's own take. It's hard to make an informed review of a movie that I haven't seen yet. I always prefer the more eloquent parts of movies I like that they never show in the trailers, and I'm confident this has eloquent parts. I'm confident it's not Batman TV show campy comedy parodying itself. That's not Miller's style. It's darkly organic character-driven humor coming from the characters reactions and interactions with each other. Producer Deborah Del Prete clarified that. "There's nothing campy about the movie - it's really organic humor."

We agree that Scarlett Johanssan looks hot, but that's hardly a reason to watch a film that looks this bad in every other way.

At least we agree on Scarlett. We will have to just agree to disagree on the looks of the film. As you say, different tastes and perspectives.

 

[IDrawDeadPeople]

It's darkly organic character-driven humor coming from the characters reactions and interactions with each other. Producer Deborah Del Prete clarified that. "There's nothing campy about the movie - it's really organic humor."

You and I both know that DelPrete is saying organic as in human waste... it's a nicer way of saying potty humor. As in "covered in fesces, getting smashed over the head with a toilet" potty humor.

As in "Come on! Toilets are always funny!" kind of humor.

In Miller's mind, organic = poop. I know. I had the imagination of a Jr. Higher once, too.

 

[theMan-Bat]

You and I both know that DelPrete is saying organic as in human waste... it's a nicer way of saying potty humor. As in "covered in fesces, getting smashed over the head with a toilet" potty humor.

As in "Come on! Toilets are always funny!" kind of humor.

In Miller's mind, organic = poop. I know. I had the imagination of a Jr. Higher once, too.

The toilet scene was laugh-out-loud hilarious if you can appreciate that type of humor. I guess I'm childish but that's funny to me.

 

[mego joe]

Hopeful plenty of people will get their moneys worth of entertainment and enjoy the film. I recall the nerd rage about much more than Keaton's casting in '89. Looking back at what was said my '89 fanzines (Comics Scene, Comics Interview, Amazing Heroes): "Keaton's Batman costume looks more like RoboCop's armor than Batman's cloth. Batman's not RoboCop. The Batplane has rocket launchers and machine guns? Batman is going to be using a gun!? Uh-oh, the canon has been violated. Where is Robin? Prince is going to be doing the soundtrack? I thought they would have something like a John Williams soundtrack. The soundtrack should be mysterious background music. Is this going to be a rock soundtrack? I can not believe it's going to be rock singing all though the movie. Jack Nicholson doesn't look like the Joker." And that was just before they saw the film. After, "I waited in line for that? That wasn't anything like the comics. That sucked. Micheal Keaton still doesn't look like Batman. The Joker killing Batman's parents? Alfred letting Vicki Vale into the Batcave? The dialogue 'I've got a flying mouse to kill and I want to clean my claws?' God, I hate that movie. The Joker is not Jack. They should have adapted 'Killing Joke.'" But general audiences loved the movie and didn't nitpick all the deviations from the source material.

So you hate Batman '89? Interesting. I guess I didn't have my finger on the nerd pulse back then. I was concerned about casting Keaton- Nicholson seemed like a great choice acting wise- one viewing of The Shining was the clincher. My point was simply that once you started seeing things about the filme- pictures, trailers etc... It looked good. Keaton pulled it off. It's not like they gave Batman superpowers or changed his origin. It's still the essence of Batman. Sure there were some things that weren't quite right, but the Spirit isn't like that. The more I see the less confidence I have in it as it being "The Spirit."

The film obviously takes liberties with the source material. It's Miller's version of the Spirit. It's Miller's own interpretation, he's own take. It's hard to make an informed review of a movie that I haven't seen yet. I always prefer the more eloquent parts of movies I like that they never show in the trailers, and I'm confident this has eloquent parts. I'm confident it's not Batman TV show campy comedy parodying itself. That's not Miller's style. It's darkly organic character-driven humor coming from the characters reactions and interactions with each other. Producer Deborah Del Prete clarified that. "There's nothing campy about the movie - it's really organic humor."

It's hard to believe that quote based on what we've seen and heard about the trailers and Sam Jackson's over-the-top Octopus.

At least we agree on Scarlett. We will have to just agree to disagree on the looks of the film. As you say, different tastes and perspectives.

You said in another post that you were childish, so I guess I'll have to chalk that up as an explanation in the differeing tastes.

It's just a shame that Will Eisner's creation is not getting the same reverance and panel to screen treatment that Miller's own Sin City and 300 received and apparently the most anticipated comic film coming down the pipe- Watchmen. Additionally, Miller's Spirit just doesn't seem to have the gravitas and intensity of The Dark Knight.

 

[Dr.Omega]

cant wait for that book

 

[theMan-Bat]

So you hate Batman '89? Interesting.

No, it's one of my favorite films and I didn't nitpick all the deviations from the Batman source material in Burton's two Batman films, just as I'm not nitpick all the deviations from the Spirit source material in Miller's film.

I guess I didn't have my finger on the nerd pulse back then. I was concerned about casting Keaton- Nicholson seemed like a great choice acting wise- one viewing of The Shining was the clincher. My point was simply that once you started seeing things about the filme- pictures, trailers etc... It looked good. Keaton pulled it off. It's not like they gave Batman superpowers or changed his origin. It's still the essence of Batman. Sure there were some things that weren't quite right, but the Spirit isn't like that. The more I see the less confidence I have in it as it being "The Spirit."

They did change Batman's origin by having the Joker be the killer of his parents instead of Joe Chill, but that and all the other changes to Batman didn't bother me because it worked well in the film. And the changes to The Spirit are not bothering me because it looks like it will work well in the film to me.

It's hard to believe that quote based on what we've seen and heard about the trailers and Sam Jackson's over-the-top Octopus.

Jack Nicholson's Joker was way over-the-top, too, but I wouldn't call him campy, however, I know other people disagree.

You said in another post that you were childish, so I guess I'll have to chalk that up as an explanation in the differeing tastes.

I was being sarcastic.

It's just a shame that Will Eisner's creation is not getting the same reverance and panel to screen treatment that Miller's own Sin City and 300 received and apparently the most anticipated comic film coming down the pipe- Watchmen. Additionally, Miller's Spirit just doesn't seem to have the gravitas and intensity of The Dark Knight.

We shall see.