So apparently Brad Peyton’s kiddie flicks (Journey 2, Kitty Galore) have earned enough dough to allow him to move into more serious, adultish properties in Hollywood. In all sincerity- good for that guy. The property he has either shown interest in or accepted an offer for is Lobo at Warner Brothers, which was originally a pre-Sherlock Guy Ritchie interest at the studio. At that point it was a film about Lobo touching down on earth to track down four intergalactic assholes, and then partnering with a hot chick for some reason. Actually, come to think of it, Lobo was basically what Thor became. Huh.
In any event, Peyton is rewriting the flick as well as directing it, though I’d expect the rating to still be aimed at PG-13, considering the director’s background (and the fact that selling this at an R-rating would be suicide). So who knows how the hell he’ll make a story about a silly, space-hog riding bounty hunter work. The character (having killed the rest of his species with a high school science project) has a similar “last man” thing going on with Superman, though I doubt he’ll be crossing over anytime soon.
My only real frame of reference with Lobo is from the Superman Animated Series, in which he was a fun, tongue-in-cheek side character that injected a little humor and comic-style immaturity into an otherwise serious-faced show. Brad Garret voiced the character in a way that nicely foiled Tim Daly as Superman, and was memorable enough that anyone else is just going to sound weird.
I dunno- if WB was doing this more, I think I might actually prefer this approach to Marvel’s. Instead of one big, more consistently bland identity, we could have a ton of one-shots and vision-driven franchises throwing all kinds of cool shit at the walls. I’d toss out crossovers in a minute (at least for most of the DCU) if it meant singular films/franchises with more unique character. Alas, WB hasn’t greenlit enough properties for that philosophy to gain any traction, and that wouldn’t be suited for the MCU anyway (don’t worry, I’m excited as shit to see The Avengers too- I just wished its prequels were better).
This sounds like an arrangement that may actually go somewhere (the Ritchie project wasn’t fated to happen), so we’ll keep you up to date.
Twitter
Comment Below
Message Board
Source | Deadline
8 comments
I agree and i disagree with you. While the Marvel films leading up to “The Avengers” may not have been great, with the exception of “Iron Man” of course, “The Incredible Hulk”, “Iron Man 2″,” “Thor” & “Captain America” we’re all good to very good. That being said, if “The Avengers” is as good as i’ve been hearing it is, don’t you think the payoff is worth it. And i like the direction “Iron Man 3”, “Thor 2″ & Captain America 2” seem to be headed in, they should have a great shot at being better than their predecessors. And if the villian is who i think it will be in “Avengers 2”, things are looking bright for Marvel’s future. That’s not even to mention the possibilities of a “Doctor Strange”,”Gardians Of The Galaxy”,”Inhumans”, “Black Panther”, “Ant Man” or “Shield” film.
Renn Brown, Brad Garret would be…Perfect if he were playing…Sherrif Lobo, in a movie version of…The Misadventures of Sherrif Lobo!
Sorry, but it seems disingenuous to criticise the prequels to the Avengers, while pumping up the prospect of a Lobo film. Warner Bros would give an arm and a leg to have a fully functioning set of crossover franchises.
The disaster that was Green Lantern was a poor man’s Iron Man.
Not meaning to be a Marvel fanboy, but the fact that they’re looking at a Lobo film just shows that WB and DC don’t have any idea what they’re doing…except praying that Batman and Superman work again.
I love the idea of Brad Garrett playing the live action version, that’s pretty great. I always envisioned Lobo as British, though, for some reason. Maybe Vinnie Jones?
How crazy is it that we live in a world where Spider-Man and the X-Men AREN’T considered the big Hollywood hitters for Marvel right now? Tired of all the crossover stuff? Remember, Marvel DOES have more going on than just the Avengers, if not as a studio, at least for their other characters.
Also, I hate when people refer to the Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, and Cap films as “prequels” to the Avengers. OK, maybe Cap mostly falls into that category, as it fills in some blanks and elaborates on things brought up in previous films while bookended by segments that take place after everything, but I believe that all of the other films up to this point have been a PRELUDE to the Avengers because they were there first. Avengers is the sequel to all of those movies, and it wouldn’t be coming if it wasn’t for the success of and the groundwork laid by the previous films, not the other way around, but it would be pretty fantastic if Avengers works as a self-contained film that doesn’t require you to have seen everything else, that if you happen to be one of the 8 people that didn’t see Iron Man, you COULD go watch that for the first time to see what this Stark dude was all about before he started hanging out with Thor, Hulk, and Captain America.
So… Ron Perlman?
Holy shit, are you like 12 years old? Prior to being bought by Disney and infused with cash, all Marvel did was various one-shots and odd ball singular franchises. Jesus dude, get a fucking clue.
One shots and odd ball singular franchises???
You mean like Iron Man…the first movie that Marvel made…without Disney?
The one that finished with the teaser for the Avengers?
Not sure what you’re talking about… but you seem to be doing it vehemently.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.