Joel Schumacher Eyeing Neil Gaiman's Sandman

[Katsuro]

Why? I think Sandman is much better suited for an animated film than a live action one.

That just feels kinda pointless to me. I mean, I've always felt the primary purpose of an adaptation should be to bring the story to a new audience. Movies are more popular that comics, novels, and video games combined, afterall. So I think that if you make an adaptation that's not gonna appeal to the average filmgoer, and get people to watch it who have never even heard of Sandman, then why do it at all?

An anime (or even American animation) Sandman is going to appeal to the exact same crowd of people that the book appeals to. Even if it gets a wide release in theaters, people who see the trailers are just gonna think of it as some cartoon.

 

[Agentsands77]

Also I could see Schumacher doing an awesome job.

I can't, largely because he's never done a remotely awesome job on any film and has never made a single good film. I have no reason to have any faith in him.

 

[Killgore]

I can't, largely because he's never done a remotely awesome job on any film and has never made a single good film. I have no reason to have any faith in him.

Exactly. Anyone who thinks that Schumacher has ever made a good film needs to watch some truly great movies. Earlier someone compared him to Brian De Palma, but that is grossly unwarranted. Untouchables is a phenomenally directed flick. Carrie and Scarface are classics. Even his duds like Dressed to Kill and Body Double display a far greater talent than any Schumacher tripe.

 

[The Question]

That just feels kinda pointless to me. I mean, I've always felt the primary purpose of an adaptation should be to bring the story to a new audience. Movies are more popular that comics, novels, and video games combined, afterall. So I think that if you make an adaptation that's not gonna appeal to the average filmgoer, and get people to watch it who have never even heard of Sandman, then why do it at all?

An anime (or even American animation) Sandman is going to appeal to the exact same crowd of people that the book appeals to. Even if it gets a wide release in theaters, people who see the trailers are just gonna think of it as some cartoon.

First of all, don;t refer to it as an anime. I really don't see a point in drawing such distinctions between American and Japanese animation.


Second, Miyazaki's films are much more well respected than that. And they're so absolutely brillaint that I think he's one of the few people that can do Sandman justice.

 

[Movies205]

Exactly. Anyone who thinks that Schumacher has ever made a good film needs to watch some truly great movies. Earlier someone compared him to Brian De Palma, but that is grossly unwarranted. Untouchables is a phenomenally directed flick. Carrie and Scarface are classics. Even his duds like Dressed to Kill and Body Double display a far greater talent than any Schumacher tripe.

I didn't say he made a good film... I said that Schumacher made decent films that never quite hit the mark while all bieng entertainment. DePalma is a film-historian, all his movies feel like homages to other great movies... Hell in The Untouchables the shot of hte baby carriage at the end is taken directly out of "Battleship Potemkin"... And for someone who seen such great movies tell me have you even see the original Scarface? Directed by the awesome Howard Hawks and has the equally awesome Paul Muni? Tell me have you seen any Alfred Hitchcock movies considering that DePalma takes a lot of his style from his movies? DePalma is better than Schumacher however, his movies for the most part fail to hit the mark as well... Outside of the Untouchables and some other movies. CArrie, also leaves a lot to be desired.

Anynthing else to add, hotshot?

 

[Agentsands77]

I didn't say he made a good film... I said that Schumacher made decent films that never quite hit the mark while all bieng entertainment.

I think that's too generous. He's never made a particular good piece of "entertainment," either. He's made mediocre films across the board, whether looking at them as art or entertainment. And anyway, SANDMAN would need to be a piece of art, not just entertainment.

 

[Movies205]

I think that's too generous. He's never made a particular good piece of "entertainment," either. He's made mediocre films across the board, whether looking at them as art or entertainment. And anyway, SANDMAN would need to be a piece of art, not just entertainment.

To each his own... 8 MM, Phonebooth, and Falling Down are all entertaining films... But to each his own...

 

[Agentsands77]

They're neither as offensively bad as some movies (sure, these films are far above, say, xXx), but not even good enough for me to ever want to see them again. Purely mediocre, neither very entertaining nor particularly well-made.

SANDMAN needs to be a masterpiece. I have no indication that Schumacher can deliver that.

 

[Killgore]

I didn't say he made a good film... I said that Schumacher made decent films that never quite hit the mark while all bieng entertainment. DePalma is a film-historian, all his movies feel like homages to other great movies... Hell in The Untouchables the shot of hte baby carriage at the end is taken directly out of "Battleship Potemkin"... And for someone who seen such great movies tell me have you even see the original Scarface? Directed by the awesome Howard Hawks and has the equally awesome Paul Muni? Tell me have you seen any Alfred Hitchcock movies considering that DePalma takes a lot of his style from his movies? DePalma is better than Schumacher however, his movies for the most part fail to hit the mark as well... Outside of the Untouchables and some other movies. CArrie, also leaves a lot to be desired.

Anynthing else to add, hotshot?

I regard Hitchcock as the greatest director ever. I own the bulk of his films on DVD and those that I don't I have on VHS awaiting replacement. Yes, I realize that Untouchables quotes Battleship Potemkin , but that is what makes the scene so brilliant. It was unnecessary for him to do so as homaging Eisenstein so precisely would have been more difficult than choreographing his own shootout, but DePalma chooses to wear his pedigree on his sleeve. Besides, I prefer Gilliam's parody of the scene in Brazil.

And yes, I've seen the 1932 Scarface. In fact that was the main reason I bought the Scarface box set as the Hawks DVD was otherwise unavailable.

I'll admit, Carrie hasn't aged well, but that is one of the things that makes De Palma so great. His movies, from Scarface to Blow Out (again a paraphrase of the superior Blow-Up by Michelangelo Antonioni) to Body Double and even the piss-poor recent flick, all capture the time period flawlessly. From the wardrobe, to the set design and the musical score, Scarface and Dressed to Kill are immersed in 1980's excess. Cheesy as parts may be, Carrie is a great snapshot of Prom 1975. He creates great environments for his characters to invade. He's definitely an artist and an auteur, both terms would never be used to describe the pedestrian Schumacher.


BTW, please install this Mozilla plug-in and use it.
http://spellbound.sourceforge.net/

 

[Spoon Tang]

pwned

 

[st barbara]

Obviously no one would attempt to make ALL of "Sandman" into one movie. However, it might be possible to do a single "arc" of the strory as a movie.

 

[Caliber]

Scumacher is a talented director with a pretty good track record - despite his two Batman movies. As long as the studio doesn't pressure him to dumb it down, and he doesn't get a hankering to - to borrow a line from The Producers - make it gay, make it gay, make it gay!, I think he could do a fine job with it.

Hes made some good movies but he should never make another comic film. Hes proven that he can do do dark or psychological films but not Sandman. Get someone like David Fincher or the guy who directed the Fountain for Sandman. Sorry I forgot the guys name.

 

[Silvermoth]

Darren Aronofsky, and I agree with you.

I'm not usually a fan of him but I can see Johnathan Rhys Meyers playing the lead well.

 

[The Major]

Actually, I´m wondering if that´s not Schumacher´s attempt to redeem himself with comic book fans...

Then he can redeem himself on a low profile franchise. Sandman isn't it.

Put him on Manhunter or The Question instead.

One way or another, to me the best way to adapt Sandman is the same as Preacher, an HBO series (MSJ, are you reading this?)

Agreed.

Though I don't like MSJ on Preacher. He's already messed up two comic adaptions already.

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

I would rather not have Joel do another DC property ever again. He had his shot...he had two and he failed...big time.

I agree. He was the one who for the most part ruined the Batman franchise in the mid 90's.

 

[Sandman138]

I used to think Michelle Gondry could make a good Sandman movie. Now? Not so sure. Guillermo Del Toro could definitely get the creatures and the dreaming to look amazing, I don't know that he could handle all the subtexts as much as I love the man's work.

Even before you get to a director though, you have to deal with adapting the work and it isn't a work that lends itself to Hollywood. No superheroes, no big action scenes, none of the trappings of the comic book movie formula. The main story is about the main character setting himself up to die as a form of penance for what he comes to see as past sins. That won't make the cut (and Guard will still be here telling us all that Dream dying was never necessary to the story anyways). We have a very mature exploration sexuality throughout he book, from the history of prostitution to transexuality. That's gonna get cut. Then there is the undercurrent of HIV/AIDS that is going on throughout the series. That's ignoring all the short stories that can't really fit anywhere in a movie but are essential to understanding why Dream does what he does. Who the hell is gonna greenlight that? If it did make it to the screen I'd say there is a 95% chance that it wouldn't resemble Sandman in any way, shape, or form. It doesn't fit the formula for a comic book movie, the story appeals to a demographic that they aren't interested in, and it's got a lot of elements that actively discourage their main bases.

 

[The Guard]

and Guard will still be here telling us all that Dream dying was never necessary to the story anyways

Uh...what the hell?

 

[Sandman138]

Watchmen. Veidt.

 

[Infinity9999x]

First of all, don;t refer to it as an anime. I really don't see a point in drawing such distinctions between American and Japanese animation.


Second, Miyazaki's films are much more well respected than that. And they're so absolutely brillaint that I think he's one of the few people that can do Sandman justice.

It doesn't matter how well respected the films are, a cartoon is still a cartoon in the eyes of the general public. Katsuro's point was that an animated film wouldn't be bringing Sandman to a different audience. Largely, the only people who would watch an animated Sandman film would be the ones who read the comic to begin with. A live-action movie would bring Sandman to a larger audience.

 

[The Guard]

Watchmen. Veidt.

I maintain that his survival isn't neccessary to the story. But why would I just make the same argument about Dream if that storyline was used?

 

[Sandman138]

It was a joke.

 

[The Guard]

Ohhhhhhh

 

[İndiana Jones]

If this happens i'll kill myself

 

[Sandman138]

Darren Aronofsky, and I agree with you.

I'm not usually a fan of him but I can see Johnathan Rhys Meyers playing the lead well.

No way. He's totally Desire.

 

[Sandman138]

If this happens i'll kill myself

nonononono kill Schumacher. At least then you are being productive.