"A pet dog that comes from hell and is red?"
April 1st, 2004
Hellboy director Guillermo del Toro encountered some resistance when he talked to the studios about his desire to make a faithful adaptation of Mike Mignola's creation.
[...]
"An executive said to me, 'What about a regular actor who gets angry and turns into Hellboy?'" said del Toro, wrinkling his face in disgust. "I go, 'That's … not … very good.'"
"Then they would say, 'What if you call him Hellboy and he comes from Hell and all that, but he looks like a guy?' Then they would suggest things like, 'Can he have a Hellmobile?' 'Can he have a dog? A pet dog that comes from hell and is red?'"
[...]
I just wish UK cinemagoers weren't going to have to wait until September to see for ourselves whether del Toro & Co have pulled it off.
[Via Blog of a Bookslut]
April 3rd, 2004 at 22:40
Deep heavy sigh. Part of what's wrong with the world is that the sort of people who say this kind of thing (and have all the money and hence the power) aren't being hunted down and killed outright. We need to get them out of the gene pool completely. There have been so many comic-book adaptations that have been embarrassing flops and they *still* don't get it.
April 3rd, 2004 at 23:15
We can but hope that if enough self-confessed geek film-makers get to make faithful adaptations which do well financially then the message will get through. Since Hellboy was made relatively cheaply, there's every hope that it'll be another profitable film made by a geek who kept geekish sensibilities in mind without turning off new audiences. Of course, it helps if the director/writer in question is actually talented as well as being a fan.
Not that comic books are the only type of adaptation Hollywood messes with like this. After all, a US TV executive wanted to make an adaptation of Fawlty Towers without the character of Basil Fawlty.
April 3rd, 2004 at 23:33
All the reviews I've seen so far (only about six) have raved about it as one of the best comic book adaptions ever. This from folks who commonly sneer at the genre, such as A. O. Scott in the NY Times, or Stephen Hunter of the WashPo, as well as the comics-neutral Roger Ebert. All entirely unfamiliar with the comic. (As am I, other than by reputation for years.)
Nice to see the always under-rated Ron Perlman getting some attention and respect; it obviously takes a special kind of actor to so successfully and consistently emote from under tons of latex (although his more or less characterless character in Star Trek: Nemesis did nothing for me, but that was part of the general failure of the writing of that film, I should think). (Andreas Katulas obviously springs to mind as another of the few actors in this category, along with Armin Shimmerman.)
Perlman made a charming appearance on one of the second-tier late-night chat shows last night, even doing a bit of lounge-singing, and allowing that, yes, he still gets a bit of mail and attention from Beauty and the Beast, which he described as a rapturous experience.
I really must get around to finally seeing Mimic, one of the few movies made from a John W. Campbell story (I can only think of one other adapted Campbell story, off-hand; the obvious multiplely-remade one).
April 4th, 2004 at 00:16
Thanks for pointing to this! I'm seeing the movie tonight and adore Ron Perlman, plus saw Devil's Backbone last night on DVD. Viva del Toro!
April 4th, 2004 at 00:25
My sole experience of the comic comes from having read a couple of the stories which are available at the Dark Horse web site. I enjoyed the stories I read online, but I think I really need to see the character in print over a run of stories to properly "get" him. I might pick up one of the trade paperbacks some time between now and the film's UK release date, but my comic-buying budget for the next few months is pretty much spoken for: I'm definitely going to be buying the last two collections of Grant Morrison's New X-Men run and the next collection of Warren Ellis' Planetary. (And of course if the Joss Whedon/John Cassaday Astonishing X-Men is collected any time soon then I'll probably have to buy that too.)
To be sure, any film that gets Mr Perlman the attention he deserves is good news. I must admit that I'd forgotten he was in Nemesis, but then I've been trying to forget that entire film. I've enjoyed him in everything else I've caught him in. He comes across in the interviews I've read recently as a humble guy who isn't going to let it go to his head if Hellboy turns out to be a really big hit and he's asked to do a sequel.
[Incidentally, I know I'd certainly pay good money to see a film featuring Messrs Shimmerman, Katsulas and Perlman. If they could find roles for Jeffrey Combs, Andy Robinson and Bruce Campbell then they could pretty much name their price.]
I know I've seen Mimic, but for some reason it made very little lasting impression on me. Unlike John Carpenter's adaptation of Who Goes There?, which is on my all-time favourite list.
April 4th, 2004 at 03:46
I saw Hellboy yesterday. Looked great; some good action; totally flat characters I never gave a damn about.
Keep your expectations on B-grade monster movie and you might still be favorably impressed.
April 4th, 2004 at 06:53
"[Incidentally, I know I'd certainly pay good money to see a film featuring Messrs Shimmerman, Katsulas and Perlman. If they could find roles for Jeffrey Combs, Andy Robinson and Bruce Campbell then they could pretty much name their price.]"
Ooh, ooh, while we're dreaming, can we throw in Peter Jurasik as well?
See, Jurasik plays the grandson of a character played by Lon Chaney….
I have no objection to Andy Hallet also having a role.
I seem to recall reading that much of the plot of the Hellboy movie came from a set of issues written by John Byrne, by the way.
April 4th, 2004 at 13:37
Of course, you're quite right: if you're going to employ Andreas Katsulas then you've got to find a way to have Peter Jurasik in there to bicker with him.