The first trailer is up for the Losers. It looks like they are drastically changing the storyline while keeping some of the cooler scenes. I’m cool with that. It also looks like they’ve increased the humour factor. I’m not particularly cool with that (see my comments on Red). But, whatever–I’m giving this one the benefit of the doubt for a few reasons.

1) It looks like they’ve got the characters done well enough. I don’t think I can see Clay and Roque from the comic fist-bumping, but Pooch, Cougar and Jensen look about right. Jensen might be a little bit too geek-chic and too little geek-geek, but I can live with that.

2) I never did like the actual resolution in the comic book. The Max revelation never did it for me. If they’ve been able to get the basic cool badassedness that was the Losers into a single movie, I’m ready to accept a lot of deviations from the original.

Let’s just say I’m cautiously optimistic. I may even try to pull the required strings to get to see this in the theatre.

Check out the trailer at MSN Movies.

According to Summit Entertainment, principal photography on the movie adaptation of the comic Red has begun in Toronto.

Now Red is another release from my favourite comic writer, Warren Ellis. Its story has led me into at least one mental exercise. I think Bruce Willis is a great choice to play the lead character. The problem, for me, comes in the form of the plot summary. To whit:

“Red” is the story of Frank Moses (Willis), a former black-ops CIA agent, who is now living a quiet life. That is, until the day a hi-tech assassin shows up intent on killing him. With his identity compromised and the life of the woman he cares for, Sarah (Parker), endangered, Frank reassembles his old team (Freeman, Malkovich and Mirren) in a last ditch effort to survive.

Um, no.

Okay, I’m not against changing stories to suit cinematic necessities, that’s kind of what adapting is all about, but this pretty much fucks up a few of the essential parts of what makes Red awesome.

1) “. . . the life of the woman he cares for, Sarah (Parker), endangered . . .” I think it’s a little more poignant that he doesn’t have anyone in his life. He exchanges correspondence with his niece in England, but that’s about it. Paul Moses (of the comics) seems too involved wrestling with the demons of his past to be able to establish anything but the most desultory of relationships with the outside world. This man was devastated by what his country demanded of him, but he paid the price–willingly. That’s what makes his homicidal reaction so believable and–to a degree–sympathetic.

2) “. . . reassembles his old team . . .” Paul Moses works alone. See above.

I mean, I’m thrilled with the possibility of seeing Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich and Helen Mirren working together on the screen, but this again takes something that was poignant into crass action flick territory. Now, I’m a huge fan of crass action flicks, I just think it’s a mistake to take something that works and start messing around with it, just because you can. There is nothing more cinematic about a team. In fact, what has been done by creating all these excess characters, is remove time that could be used to develop the Moses character.

But wait, the real kicker? From the article:

The story, . . . has been characterized by Schwentke as a funny take on the more serious source material.

Are you fucking kidding me? That’s like producing a remake of Hard-Boiled as a light-hearted romantic comedy. What is the fucking point?

In truth, the comic is pretty much stitched together scenes of violence, but I think the first issue provides enough background and character that what follows can be seen through its lens. And what I see is not what this plot summary relates.

So in the end, this movie is more like my own imaginings–an homage or reference to Red–rather than an adaptation. It’s trying to cash in on the name recognition (for what it is, which–with all due reference–can’t be that much) without keeping the essence of the story.And the essence of the story is not killing people. That totally misses the point.

This is being cross-posted everywhere I can.

I’m betting you’ve all heard about the disaster in Haiti. I’m sure that you would love to be able to positively contribute to helping the people of Haiti. There are lots of ways to do so, from the Red Cross to Worldvision, but I’m going to let you know about a way to donate and get a huge thank you in return.

Go over to RPG Now or Drive-thru RPG and donate $20. In return, you’ll get over $1,000 in RPG PDFs. That includes Albenistan: Election Day, Line Zero, and Cyber-state Avatar Toolkit.

The deal is tremendous, and I applaud all the publishers who have provided gifts. If you use PDFs at all or have any interest in checking out gaming PDFs, go get these now. Even if you are soulless, it’s more than $1,000 in product for $20.

Go donate now and get a huge RPG thank-you in return.

Man, the internet and its crazy casting rumours . . . which I help to propagate in my own little way.

You’re welcome.

Okay, so the deal with Sinestro is that it is not Jackie Earle Haley, which is exactly what he said, but which many sources didn’t see fit to believe him on. Now Martin Campbell, the director of Green Lantern, has totally squashed the rumour, and replaced it with one of his own.

“In fact, we’re in negotiations with Mark Strong to play Sinestro.”

Okay, so not so much rumour as fact.

I don’t know if I like all this truthiness and from-the-sourcedness. I think I much prefer rampant speculation. Let’s start a rumour that Mark Strong is all a smokescreen while the studio tries to get . . . wait for it . . . Mr. T to play Sinestro.

I can hear the fanboy anguish and it warms my heart.

So, Mark Strong as Sinestro–I can totally dig that. And Martin Campbell goes on in the same interview to tempt us with visions of others from the Green Lantern Corps, such as Kilowog.

Okay, so maybe I’m a teeny, tiny little bit excited about this movie. Can Campbell bring it all together and make it awesome? Here’s hoping.

So, listening to music again on the way to work. I started out with a great episodefrom the BBC’s Thinking Allowed about the concept of the working class, income disparities and self-identification. It was very, very good and very interesting. I’m going to go back to it. But I realized about two minutes into it that my brain was not in the right place.

So I put on music.

My brain was in that place.

I was listening to Metric’s recent album Fantasies. While the thoughts started coming on Satellite Mind, it overflowed into the album “Grow Up and Blow Away” (Two awesome tracks from that are “On the Sly” and “Soft Rock Star”).

Now, this is probably based a lot on the Warren Ellis and Cully Hamner comicRed (which is in the planning stages of becoming a motion picture). It’s basically the story of an assassin happily living in retirement (though haunted by the actions he undertook on behalf of his country). A political appointee to the CIA decides he needs to be removed because if anyone found out, it would be scandal.

I don’t think Mr. Ellis likes politicians.

Anyway, since the character in the comic is the best at what he does (and what he does isn’t very nice), he is able to survive the assassination attempt. He then calls in to his handlers that he is going “Red”–active. And then the shit really gets crazy.

I really like the concept of the person who has paid his/her due not being allowed to rest, and the extremes to which they may be pushed. There is also an aspect of divine retribution in the comic that is very satisfying.

So, in my head, I started to imagine a movie. The story is of an agent named John (not sure of a last name–I was thinking possibly Callow or Caiaphas). He’s now retired (though still relatively young), and the opening is of him making breakfast, enjoying it with his wife and daughter. Then, a cell phone starts ringing. Everyone stops. The daughter is confused. The wife is obviously worried. John is somewhere between annoyed and fearful. He goes to a drawer that has lots of odds and ends, old papers and such, and pulls out the cell phone. He answers.

“This is Six.”

On the other end we hear: “Status active. In motion.” The line goes dead.

John stares at the phone for a moment, then shoves it in his pocket. He looks at his wife, and she knows what this means. His daughter doesn’t.

“I have to go to work,” he tells her.

“But you work from home,” she says.

“Not any more.”

He gives his kid and his wife a kiss, the one with his wife lingering–a good -bye, and the opening montage starts.

With the credits rolling, he’s in some kind of vault. He puts on body armour under his shirt and suit. He straps on a few guns and knives, loads an SMG into a book bag or leather briefcase. We see him emerge from his garage, suit on, briefcase on his shoulder. He smiles and waves to his family, but the smile is forced.

He works for an unnamed branch of the foreign service. In my thoughts, this was Foreign Affairs in Canada. I envisioned the montage following him to work. Taking a bus into Ottawa, along Sussex, t o the Lester B Pearson building. He enters, has the proper ID to swipe himself through security, descends some stairs to a single, secure elevator. When it stops, he goes to a guarded door. He puts his hand in some kind of scanner, his eye up to another, and breathes into a third. The door opens and he is through.

The operations centre is kind of run down. This is high tech with lots of monitors and communications equipment, but this isn’t NORAD. This is small. John’s boss approaches him.

John is pissed. “I’m out.”

The boss is good-natured but firm. “You are never out. You were requested.”

“Fuck them. I did my time. I’m out. Let them do the fucking job for once.”

Turns out, there’s a powerful minister that called him in on this. The minister’s got a grudge. He’s using his influence to fuck with John.

There is a second story intertwined with this one. A Muslim male, Ismail, who had helped facilitate some terrorism in the 1990s, is being released from prison after serving his time. He’s changed. He’s denounced violence as a political means. He’s a convert to nonviolent resistance. He’s a convert to the rule of law.

The problem is that no one believes him–not the police, not the intelligence services, and not the people he used to run with. He wants to be left alone, to start a life, to start making amends, but that doesn’t look like it is going to happen.

Now, I’m hazy on the macguffin and the villain of the piece. I know that John and Ismail end up working together and end up validating each other. I hope John returns to his family in the end, though I can see him possibly dying. Maybe both of them do. Nah, they both survive. There is poetic justice for the dicks of the story and final justice for the real baddies. John disappears with his family, the final shot is them somewhere green and lush rolling hills–maybe Scotland or Ireland.

Does Ismail find his small dream? Does he get to have a family and some peace? I think that’s only fair. Since these stories need some kind of love interest, maybe he finds his. Maybe she is the macguffin–a witness or someone who knows something who must be protected, but who is unwilling to reveal that secret until Ismail convinces her.

Hmmm, that might work.

And, as usual, this has been cast.

John is played by Paul Gross, whom I consider something of a national treasure in Canada. I mean, forget Due South (though that was fun), look at Slings and Arrows, look at Men With Brooms (it wasn’t that bad), and look atPasschendaele.

As for Ismail, I’m torn between two actors I’ve cast in something else. Faran Tahir made a huge impact with a very small role in Star Trek. He’s got the gravitas, for certain. Saïd Taghmaoui, though, has been consistently good through those roles in which I’ve seen him. I don’t know, I guess see who is available and interested.

That’s after, of course, someone bankrolls the film. How about $30 mil? I can write the script for low six figures!

This is in danger of becoming the Green Lantern blog, which is odd, since I’m not particularly excited about the movie. Irony, thy name is . . . see below.

So I was out there reading Screen Rant, which I often do, and lo and behold there’s an article on Green Lantern.

And on Sinestro.

And on Sinestro’s role as: “a mentor or drill sergeant . . .”

Now this is all speculation, based on an “early script review,” and may change if/when the movie gets going.

There’s also speculation that Jackie Earle Haley, he of Rorshach, is in some way, shape, or form connected to the role of Sinestro, even though he has specifically denied that.

Now this is interesting, and I think introducing Sinestro as the mentor to later use him as a villain–especially with a substantial portion of the audience well aware of the irony as Sinestro trains Hal Jordan–is the way to go. The way not to go, I would argue, is to have two villains in the movie.

Which is why the article’s reference to Legion as the other villain (Hector Hammond being the first) makes me just shake my head. Is there enough stupidity for a face palm? Perhaps not, but it is certainly moving in that direction.

What the fuck is it with Hollywood and its inability to focus? Richard Donner’s first Superman was spectacular. Guess what? One villain. Granted, Superman II rocked the house, and it had a suite of villains, but in that movie it was a collection of villains linked together. It’s like X-Men, wherein the real villain is Magneto and the other villains basically act as his surrogates. Hmmm, X-Men United kind of went with two villains as well.

Okay, okay, the FIRST movie in a franchise should only have one villain. That villain might have a posse (like R’as al Ghul in the Batman Begins), but there is one villain, one focus. I mean, there’s a lot going on in the intro to a (hoped for) franchise, so let’s not mess it up by trying to do too much.

Not seeing the script, maybe Hammond and Legion are linked somehow, like Mystique and Magneto in X-Men, or Bullseye and Kingpin in Daredevil. Still, I reserve the internet right to be offended and appalled without any concrete evidence.

While not actually offended nor appalled, I reserve that right.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled stuff.

The Green Lantern info keeps coming, and none of it has made me too excited.

Recently, the Hollywood Reporter has revealed that the villain in the Green Lantern movie will be Hector Hammond. Peter Sarsgaard is in negotiations to play:

“ . . . the pathologist son of a senator who is seen as a disappointment in his father’s eyes. He becomes infused with psychic powers when he discovers a meteor.”

Now that’s a little bit different than I remember it, and Wikipedia agrees with me. No biggie. Things get changed for movies all the time. The biggie comes in that unless this is going to be one of those movies with multiple villains (please, no!), there’s not going to be too much “cosmic” about this Green Lantern movie.

It’s too early to tell, but this being the internet, I’m going make assumptions, and then move forward as though those assumptions were facts.

While the main villain need not be Sinestro—and I think introducing Sinestro as a Green Lantern, and Hal Jordan’s mentor, only to bring him back as the villain in the second or third movie—any costumed hero . . . actually, any hero could fight Hector Hammond. Hammond merely stands in for any telepathic foe. Why waste a character that may be derived or otherwise inspired by the Lensmen with an Earth-bound adventure?

I hope I’m wrong. I suppose there are ways to take a Hammond story and put it in space, but then why use Hammond?

I’ll be interested to see what grows out of this, but so far, nothing is lighting that fire of enthusiasm.

I’m saving that for Deadpool.

Interested in hearing what the script writers of Thor had to say about their work with Thor’s origins? There’s an interview with Ashley Edward Miller over at Airlock Alpha in which he talks about a lot of things including working on the Thor script. Are the fanboys ready to froth?

“It’s about as close as you can reasonably expect it to be” to the comic book, Miller said. “Obviously, you have to make some adjustments, and you have to compress some things simply for the sake of being able to get a lot of information out and being able to create a believable fantasy world that intersects with ours.”

Now for me, this makes 100% sense. Of course you have to make adjustments when writing an adaptation. There are always going to be those people who feel the rage rising and get ready to Hulk out with any change made. Those people will never be happy with an adaptation.

I’m totally cool with changes, as long as they don’t go the route of a certain other live-action Thor I seem to recall.

Present Dune director Pierre Morel had an interview with MTV in which he discussed his love for the book. He kind of dissed David Lynch’s movie in an off-hand way.

“As a David Lynch movie, I loved it. As a ‘Dune’ fan, I was not such a big fan.”

Well, I have to be honest, I was introduced to Dune through David Lynch’s movie, so I continue to have a soft spot in my heart for it. I certainly prefer it to the Sci Fi (Syfy?) version, which had aspects more faithful to the book, but also lacked a lot of the verve and skill that marked Lynch’s foray.

The fact is, there is nothing Morel can say to quell my anxieties. He can talk as good of a game as he likes. Are the studios going to give him free rein? They did with Peter Jackson. Maybe they’ll take another gamble. But even if they do, can Morel deliver?

In time, I guess we’ll see.

That’s if this makes it to principal photography.

IF.

What do we have to celebrate today? Well, it seems that Monday became Thursday when no one was looking.

Well, maybe someone was looking . . . through a camera that is.

Monday marked the beginning of prinicpal photography for Kenneth Branagh’s Thor. It is, therefore, Thor’s Day.

What can I say other then: squeeeeeeeeeee!

Wow, that was as totally unexpected as it was lame. I will try better next time.

However, the sentiment remains: yay Thor! Yay principal photography! Vive le Branagh!