Characters that have yet to get a "definitive" movie treatment?

[JulianPerez]

Superman's had not one but two definitive movies: SUPERMAN, or SUPERMAN RETURNS, whichever you prefer. He's had an actor intimately associated with the part (namely, Chris Reeves) and hell, he's got definitive MUSIC. Only a few have definitive music. You can have an Indiana Jones movie without Harrison Ford, but you can't have an Indy picture without the "Raiders March."

In fact, the Superman movies have been so influential that people think of

Batman got his definitive film treatment with MASK OF THE PHANTASM - a movie that captured who the character was successfully and brilliantly. It duplicated Batman's pulp world, and gave him a mystery to solve. BATMAN: THE MOVIE was fantastic, though the fact it was a comedy/parody disqualifies it from "definitive" status, though for my money, the casting was fantastic: Burgess Meredith and that funny laugh of his, that manic genius Frank Gorshin, the sexy Lee Meriwether. As much as it pains me to say it as he is a countryman of mine, only Cesar Romero didn't look like he was trying.

A lot of other characters have not been so lucky as Superman has been.

The first person that comes right to mind is Tarzan...which is strange, because he's had over 100 movies - most of which as a monosyllabic caveman very different from his dynamic Burroughs incarnation. The most frustrating part about Tarzan is that every movie version has gotten SOMETHING "right," in little bits and pieces, but nobody has ever brought all of it together: GREYSTOKE brought Tarzan's aristocratic birth and the Greystoke heritage (which most movies ignore), the Disney film captured his athleticism, his curiosity, and his pranksterish side, and most importantly, is the best screen treatment of Tarzan's relationship to his ape mother yet shown, in many ways the most powerful relationship in the first book, based on the love of a mother for a child. 

Though it swept the first-ever Raspberry awards, defies parody, and features Ator himself, Miles O'Keefe ("How much Keefe? MILES O'Keefe!"), I can't help but feel underneath it all, TARZAN THE APE-MAN had a good idea inside of it: in the Tarzan books there is an undercurrent of real eroticism. Alan Moore once observed this undercurrent of sex is the single biggest difference between the pulp heroes from the later superheroes. I suspect this is why Tarzan has appeal as a character beyond the usual audience of adventure-loving teenaged boys and not-quite-grown-up adults: sex appeal. Though I wouldn't recommend taking it to the level of softcore porn the way APE-MAN did.

It feels like the story of the blind man with the elephant: every movie's got PART of Tarzan down.

The most annoying part about Tarzan is that he may never get a definitive version with the way Hollywood is today.

Robert E. Howard's Conan is another character that's yet to get a truly definitive treatment, as much as I absolutely love CONAN THE DESTROYER, it felt like another issue of the CONAN comics (and there's a reason for that - it was written by Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway). DESTROYER is the kind of movie you make when you've got an unkillable adventure franchise on the level of James Bond...you make this movie after you make the flick that absolutely takes everybody's breath away, the RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK or FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. Conan never got his RAIDERS or FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. He got a truly unwatchable first film and a second film that feels more like the tenth Conan movie instead of the second.

More than anything, CONAN THE DESTROYER feels like a movie from an alternate universe where CONAN THE BARBARIAN wasn't such a snoozer, and it led to a Conan movie franchise like Indy, Tarzan, or James Bond.

Doc Savage and the Cthulhu Mythos of Lovecraft are two pulp fiction concepts that have been attempted but have never produced anything memorable.

Prince Valiant deserves a knock-your-socks-off movie adaptation and all it's gotten is Robert Wagner in a pageboy wig. Hey, Bakshi, here's an idea: why not put down the bong and do an animated Valiant, in the style of Hal Foster? This is one of few adventure concepts that deserves animation more than live action.

Though some may disagree, I don't see the need for a Fantastic Four, Shadow, Phantom, or Flash Gordon movie because they've GOTTEN their definitive version. With the FF, it's the seventies animated series - the voice casting was so spot-on I STILL hear Ben Grimm's voice when I read my MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE issues. And I can't possibly think of any way a contemporary movie version could possibly be a step up from the seventies Filmation Flash Gordon cartoon. The Phantom and Shadow movies both stayed period, captured the dominant character elements.

[nightwing]

I'd argue even Superman hasn't had a definitive movie treatment.  Or anyway, nothing made up til now has fully captured the character the way I imagine him.  The only thing "definitive" (as in, no need to ever attempt it again) about Superman: The Movie is John William's theme.  And Superman Returns, though I really like it, can't be definitive for the simple reason that it is so darn derivative.  (If it were a definition, it would read simply, "see Superman: The Movie").

The closest thing to a definitive treatment of Superman on screen remains the Fleischer cartoons.

I agree about Tarzan.  The funny thing is I always get the impression people shy away from the literate nobleman approach because they think it would strain credulity.  Raised by apes?  No problem.  Able to kill lions with his bare hands?  Done.  Lives in the wild but never grows a beard?  Fine.  But able to read and write, hold a conversation and understand science and politics?  Come on, that's just silly. 

Also, while I liked some things about Russell Mulcahy's Shadow film, I would never term it definitive.  I'm looking forward to seeing what Sam Raimi does with the concept.  (Obviously the less said about George Pal's Doc Savage the better, though I for one am grateful the Schwartzenegger version never got off the ground).

I'm all for trying over again...every character is open to reinterpretation.  It's only been a couple years since the Hulk but since it went over like a lead balloon they're already working on a do-over in a new style.  That's cool with me.  But then, I'm a guy who likes all 6 James Bonds (to varying degrees), so I'm big on variety.

Having said that, I think "definitive" can be a very subjective thing.  No matter how many times they do Batman, Adam West will always be the genuine article for me.  And "Flash Gordon" is by now defined almost as much by Buster Crabbe's hyperactivity and goofy FX as he is by Alex Raymond's art and plots.  But first isn't always best; I consider Jeremy Brett as close to a "definitive" Holmes as we'll ever get.  I'm willing to see other actors take a stab, but if they stopped doing Holmes films today, I'd be content knowing the Grenada series got it right.

I will say this.  Considering how many pulp and comic characters there are, it gets a bit boring seeing the umpteen-millionth version of Superman and Batman instead.  But I dont' think that was your point.

[Gangbuster]

Though some may disagree, I don't see the need for a Fantastic Four, Shadow, Phantom, or Flash Gordon movie because they've GOTTEN their definitive version. With the FF, it's the seventies animated series - the voice casting was so spot-on I STILL hear Ben Grimm's voice when I read my MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE issues. And I can't possibly think of any way a contemporary movie version could possibly be a step up from the seventies Filmation Flash Gordon cartoon. The Phantom and Shadow movies both stayed period, captured the dominant character elements.

Didn't the Fantastic Four animated series NOT have the human torch in it? I've never seen it, but heard about it. I agree about Doc Savage...too bad there were never any movie serials.

Characters that haven't had their due time on screen: Green Lantern, the Justice Society, Supergirl (I'd really like to see her introduced into the Superman movie series), and Captain America...wow, did his movie stink! And any character that has been portrayed by Dolph Lundgren has not yet had a definitive treatment...the Masters of the Universe movie made me highly upset as a kid.

[nightwing]

Didn't the Fantastic Four animated series NOT have the human torch in it? I've never seen it, but heard about it. I agree about Doc Savage...too bad there were never any movie serials.

That's right, the 70s FF cartoon did not have the Human Torch.  If memory serves, some other studio had optioned him for a rival project, though in the end they never did anything.

Johnny was replaced by H.E.R.B.I.E. the "lovable" robot, who is more or less to FF fans what Bat-Mite is to Batman fans. 




Hi yall! Don't be hatin'!

[Uncle Mxy]

With the FF, it's the seventies animated series - the voice casting was so spot-on I STILL hear Ben Grimm's voice when I read my MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE issues.

It's neat how Ted Cassidy played a mute Thing in the Addams Family (along with being Lurch, his signautre role), then only the voice of (the) Thing in the '70s cartoon.  He was also the voice actor for Lou Ferrigno in The Incredible Hulk TV series, doing the grunts and growls, and Braniac and Black Manta on the Superfriends.

Anything with H.E.R.B.I.E. in it isn't definitive. 

[Klar Ken T5477]

Four words: John Carter of Mars.

Mainly, 'cuase there hasn't been one to date (other than Bob Clampett's aborted JCOM toon in the 30s and a billion other 'announced' projects)

Imagine if Charlton Heston circa Apes or Clint Eastwood circa Spaghetti-os had made the leap -- always think of Clint when seeing Murphy Anderson's great art in the DC run of JCOM in Tarzan and Weird Worlds back in the 70s.

[Aldous]

Four words: John Carter of Mars.

Mainly, 'cuase there hasn't been one to date (other than Bob Clampett's aborted JCOM toon in the 30s and a billion other 'announced' projects)

Imagine if Charlton Heston circa Apes or Clint Eastwood circa Spaghetti-os had made the leap -- always think of Clint when seeing Murphy Anderson's great art in the DC run of JCOM in Tarzan and Weird Worlds back in the 70s.

When I was reading Judge Dredd in "2000AD" in his heyday, I was convinced Clint would make a fantastic Dredd. He would have had the sense of humour, the slim build, and the lower jaw to pull it off. (I'm talking about Dredd WAY before Americans ever got near him, so it may be hard to explain Clint's suitability. Once the yanks got hold of Dredd, they left out everything that made him work, because they didn't get it. As usual.) Clint could have been seconded to the Europeans one last time without any other American involvement.

Also reading the comics in their heyday, I always wanted to see Clint play Jonah Hex, but that was a kid's wish. It wouldn't have made much sense.

[Klar Ken T5477]

Wasn't Clint pretty much playing Jonah Hex in "Hang Em High" anyway?

Although James Garner woulda made the perfect Bat Lash since Bat was pretty much Maverick anyway?