I came across something interesting as I was traversing my way across the web.
Apparently, Quentin Tarantino was once offered to direct the Green Lantern film.
So why didn't he do it?
Tarantino said that if he was to make a superhero movie, it wouldn't be based upon an already existing comic-book character. More specifically, he stated "I'm a writer. I'd want to use my imagination and not have to fight with geeks' memories of how this character should be and, 'Oh, I cast an actor as opposed to a bodybuilder' or it's not as good as the way [DC Comics artist] Neal Adams drew him.' If I were to do something like that, I would want the fun of coming up with the superhero myself."
As awesome as it would have been seeing Hal Jordan conjuring up giant hypodermic needles and chainsaws, Tarantino has a point. It would be so much better having his unique mind conjuring up a superhero of his own creation rather than be restrained by an already established hero. But if we were to see Tarantino make a film about an already-established comic book character, I think this would be the perfect choice for him.
If you are unfamiliar with this guy, his name is Deadpool. He is a horribly disfigured, mentally unstable mercenary for hire with an encyclopedic array of pop culture references and a healing power so powerful he can survive decapitation (provided you attach his head back to his body).
Does he sound perfect for a Tarantino movie or not?
But he does have his own tragic backstory, as he was diagnosed with cancer, and in order to combat it, signed up for the Weapon X program (yes, the same one Wolverine signed on for), and was given the same healing as Wolverine's in order to combat the cancer, but the side-effects included being horribly disfigured and losing his sanity.
The great thing about Deadpool is, unlike all the other superheroes, he doesn't defeat the enemies due to a magical ring, superpowers or knives coming out of his hands, he is just a regular dude (minus the super healing) who has gone through many many years of perilous training, and as a result, is now a master marksman, an expert swordfighter and is efficient in wielding any weapon. As seen in Kill Bill, Tarantino can direct masterful sword fights, and is just as good with characters shooting their guns, so there's another plus.
But what do you think? Do you sadden at the missed opportunity of a Tarantino Green Lantern? Do you agree with Tarantino's response? Do you have a better superhero for him to do? Sound off below
And before you give the Green Lantern film a kicking, yes, Tarantino's version of Green Lantern would have been infinitely better than what we got, but be thankful we didn't get the Jack Black starring Green lantern film.
Apparently, Quentin Tarantino was once offered to direct the Green Lantern film.
So why didn't he do it?
Tarantino said that if he was to make a superhero movie, it wouldn't be based upon an already existing comic-book character. More specifically, he stated "I'm a writer. I'd want to use my imagination and not have to fight with geeks' memories of how this character should be and, 'Oh, I cast an actor as opposed to a bodybuilder' or it's not as good as the way [DC Comics artist] Neal Adams drew him.' If I were to do something like that, I would want the fun of coming up with the superhero myself."
As awesome as it would have been seeing Hal Jordan conjuring up giant hypodermic needles and chainsaws, Tarantino has a point. It would be so much better having his unique mind conjuring up a superhero of his own creation rather than be restrained by an already established hero. But if we were to see Tarantino make a film about an already-established comic book character, I think this would be the perfect choice for him.
 |
| Funny that I think Tarantino would be perfect for directing a film about Ryan Reynolds' OTHER comic book role |
If you are unfamiliar with this guy, his name is Deadpool. He is a horribly disfigured, mentally unstable mercenary for hire with an encyclopedic array of pop culture references and a healing power so powerful he can survive decapitation (provided you attach his head back to his body).
Does he sound perfect for a Tarantino movie or not?
But he does have his own tragic backstory, as he was diagnosed with cancer, and in order to combat it, signed up for the Weapon X program (yes, the same one Wolverine signed on for), and was given the same healing as Wolverine's in order to combat the cancer, but the side-effects included being horribly disfigured and losing his sanity.
The great thing about Deadpool is, unlike all the other superheroes, he doesn't defeat the enemies due to a magical ring, superpowers or knives coming out of his hands, he is just a regular dude (minus the super healing) who has gone through many many years of perilous training, and as a result, is now a master marksman, an expert swordfighter and is efficient in wielding any weapon. As seen in Kill Bill, Tarantino can direct masterful sword fights, and is just as good with characters shooting their guns, so there's another plus.
But what do you think? Do you sadden at the missed opportunity of a Tarantino Green Lantern? Do you agree with Tarantino's response? Do you have a better superhero for him to do? Sound off below
And before you give the Green Lantern film a kicking, yes, Tarantino's version of Green Lantern would have been infinitely better than what we got, but be thankful we didn't get the Jack Black starring Green lantern film.
Comments
Nice Post
Welcome to LAMB bud!
@Jesse P True, he could've ended up making the film worse than what we got, but I would've given him the chance
@Matt S cheers man
@myfilmviews.com It would obviously be awesome
@Myerla to be honest, we kind of did get a superhero from him, in the form of The Bride