According to the Hollywood Reporter, a new League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen is in the works at Disney's Hulu.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen-reboot-in-the-works-at-twentieth-hulu-1235148573/
Hopefully, they'll get it right this time.
Learnt from this article they've tried a bunch of times to reboot already. Is this a cynical effort to keep the rights from reverting to Moore & O'Neill?
Quote from: Tomwe on 18 May, 2022, 09:58:25 AM
Learnt from this article they've tried a bunch of times to reboot already. Is this a cynical effort to keep the rights from reverting to Moore & O'Neill?
Dunno, but the way these things usually work is that if they haven't actually released a film within 2/5/10 years* then the rights will revert. This includes very low budget productions which are 'released' in name only.
* whatever's on the contract
For example, the 1984 Fantastic Four film (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fantastic_Four_(unreleased_film)).
Yeah that's what I meant. Looks like the TV pilot was 2013, ten years after the first film. It was described as a 'put pilot' in the article I saw meaning Fox fits the bill if it never airs. Sounds pretty much in line with the Corman FF.
Quote from: Tomwe on 18 May, 2022, 09:58:25 AM
Learnt from this article they've tried a bunch of times to reboot already. Is this a cynical effort to keep the rights from reverting to Moore & O'Neill?
Was LOEG creator-owned or would the rights revert to the publisher?
Quote from: sheridan on 18 May, 2022, 10:50:25 AM
For example, the 1984 Fantastic Four film (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fantastic_Four_(unreleased_film)).
I actually like this - the budget/effects are shit, but it's better than some of the later ones
Pitch Meeting...
Producer: This Hyde character is great - what does he do next?
Screenwriter #1: He bugger's the invisible man to death in a fit of calculated revenge.
Producer: Next!
Quote from: Dandontdare on 18 May, 2022, 04:04:37 PM
Was LOEG creator-owned or would the rights revert to the publisher?
LoEG has moved publishers a couple of times, hasn't it? That would suggest it's creator-owned.
Indeed, LoEG was the only ABC strip that was creator owned, so it's the only one that Moore carried on with after his infamous exit from ABC. He willingly sold the movie rights and then became enraged when the studio seemed to cave in to a plagiarism lawsuit. Hence, no more Moore movies.
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 25 May, 2022, 05:17:00 PM
Indeed, LoEG was the only ABC strip that was creator owned, so it's the only one that Moore carried on with after his infamous exit from ABC. He willingly sold the movie rights and then became enraged when the studio seemed to cave in to a plagiarism lawsuit. Hence, no more Moore movies.
That's a little unfair. He became enraged when he was subjected to a multi-hour deposition by lawyers involved in the law suit, and then the studio caved over an addition to the screenplay that wasn't in the comics he'd actually written.
...and that appearance in a trial is why every adaptation since has been credited to "the original author" or not credited at all (Watchmen, V for Vendetta, etc).
So what's the consensus, stalking horse, development hell or genuine attempt to do the books?
As with all things, only time will tell.
Watchmen was an odd one - it showed that you can be fairly faithful to the original comics and still be kind of shite. I liked V for Vendetta, though, even though it removed the essential message of the comic.
Personally I have a lot of respect for the Beardy Fella for his stance on the films - he could be absolutely coining it in, but genuinely put his integrity first.
It was just faithful to the imagery though. It got a lot of the tone wrong.
You're both insanely wrong, it was a great film!
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 09 July, 2022, 06:16:42 PM
It was just faithful to the imagery though. It got a lot of the tone wrong.
I liked it when I saw it first, but it seemed to fall apart when I rewatched it. Maybe I'd been brainwashed by online criticism; but some things weren't washing any more - Laurie and Dan remorselessly murdering criminals instead of beating them up; Dan's lack of middle-aged spread and the general flashiness of action scenes; the complete avoidance of the apocalyptic moral conundrum when the big scheme is uncovered; Ozymandias' chisel-jawed statuesque appearance being replaced by a sneaky-looking weasel (no offence to him, but a Greek god he wasn't).
I much preferred the TV series; it managed to nail an Alan Moore atmosphere far better) by doing a completely new story. (Irons was a far better Ozymandias too, though I still wasn't quite on board with the arrogance and narcissism - I would have seen him as a guy who had striven hard to keep his ego in check.)
The TV series did the very Moore thing of taking an existing universe/set up and spinning it on it's head and looking at it from a new angle. Rather than trying to recreat the original it took it as a starting point to head off in a new direction and tell it's own story.
I really enjoyed the show. In early episodes I thought, "you don't need the comic to understand this". But by the end I thought, "if you don't know the comic, you won't have a clue what's going on".