Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:Why is it called Cowboy bebop?

It's the name of the ship the main characters live/ride on. Cowboys, in the context of the show, also refers to Bounty Hunters, and the show's music has a lot of bebop influences.

I am a picky anime fan. I do like a lot of it, but there are some shows I just can’t stand to watch.

However cowboy bebop is one of my favs. I liked it enough to buy it.... and that’s saying something, I had to take away 40k money to buy it

I am optimistic and hope for a hit.

But there is something in the back of my mind that says


I am not one of those guys that decide how good a movie will be by who they have playing in it.... I will probably go see this on the big screen.

Sebster -
There is a very easy way that they can make the movie "episodic" and different. do it in a way SIMILAR (not the same as) Sin City. Tell stories from differing perspectives or even from one perspective but with different themes running through it.

That said ... anime does not translate to live action well. I don't think I've seen a good translation yet (not that too many people in Hollywood are stupid enough to try again and again).

What scares me is that somehow I get the feeling that they actually stand to lose less money than simply not making this movie. I don't know how or why, but jeez there is no way this can end well in any way, but they are making it.

Pook wrote:Sebster -
There is a very easy way that they can make the movie "episodic" and different. do it in a way SIMILAR (not the same as) Sin City. Tell stories from differing perspectives or even from one perspective but with different themes running through it.

That said ... anime does not translate to live action well. I don't think I've seen a good translation yet (not that too many people in Hollywood are stupid enough to try again and again).

I normally agree with you on the point that anime doesn't translate well into live action (any animation, really). For the most part, though, Cowboy Bebop is pretty tame in the "fantastical"/"crazy sci-fi" department, and I feel that for the most part, it would be one of the better candidates to make the transition. I still would prefer it to not be made, but I feel like it wouldn't look as dumb as, say, Dragonball which relies heavily on fantastical elements for its plot/world. Basically, CB just feels a little more real.

I don't think the movie would necessarily have to be "episodic", though. I mean, the whole movie itself can be like "one long episode", kind of like Knocking on Heaven's Door. I think the thing that would hurt this movie the most would be if they decided to go the "origins" story type route.

Just hope they wait till they get a decent actor before they try to do ballad of fallen angels.

Lindsey Lohan is Wonder Woman.

You! Have! to! be! Joking!!!

Just looked it up and Joss Whedon has stepped down from directing Wonder Woman and it looks like it won't be made for a while. I can't find anywhere that shes confirmed for the part.

Yes, because a film like Wonder Woman requires an Actor of Shakespearean Calibre.....

One hear's Dame Judy was simply mortified at losing out.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Yes, because a film like Wonder Woman requires an Actor of Shakespearean Calibre.....

One hear's Dame Judy was simply mortified at losing out.

If somethings worth doing then its worth doing right. The thought of Lohan playing Wonder woman to us is like Costners version of Robin Hood or Richard Gere in First Knight would be to you chaps.

Regardless. It's DC pop culture crap, so why worry about getting a decent actress? Besides, Lohan has fantastic...ummm...assets, and thats all I'd be paying to gawp at!

Sorry mate, Linda Carter Kicks the dog poopy out of lohan in celebrity death match IMHO.

As for pop culture crap. Careful on that, a lot of your traditional heros could be considered pop culture crap. And your talking about things that have been around for over a half a century. Pop culture durability is usually along the lines of the 8-track or bell bottom pants.50 years may not be much to you 1000 year old brits but to a young country like the US thats a fair bit of time.

She has a truth lassoo, an invisible plane (why invisible?) and has these bracelets of bullett deflection thingy.

Hardly a classic beyond the inevitable status symbol for Wimmins Rights....

I can't take her seriously as a character at all! The character lacks the gravitas of Marvels creation (Magneto and Xavier were mutant equivalents to Malcom X and Martin Luther King respectively) and I fear the flm would be high camp at best, and a load of meaningless pro-feminist drivel at worst!

Not calling it a classic exactly. Just it should get the same level of resect in development and production as the newer batman and superman movies. You want to hear feminist scream. Go ahead and make it a camp film.

But there is nothing that deep about her, and therein lies the problem.

Superman has some depth, because he isn't human, and longs for a relationship etc.

Batman has a great deal of death, as for once the good guy is every bit as mental and dangerous as the bad guy, often more so!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:But there is nothing that deep about her, and therein lies the problem.

Superman has some depth, because he isn't human, and longs for a relationship etc.

Batman has a great deal of death, as for once the good guy is every bit as mental and dangerous as the bad guy, often more so!

Wonder Woman isn't human either. She's a creation of clay made by hera who had life breathed into her by the gods. She fundamentally doesn't understand the humans around her, and has been banished from themascera, her homeland, after stealing hera's armor.

There's a lot of potential for depth there, I think.

Doctor Thunder wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:But there is nothing that deep about her, and therein lies the problem.

Superman has some depth, because he isn't human, and longs for a relationship etc.

Batman has a great deal of death, as for once the good guy is every bit as mental and dangerous as the bad guy, often more so!

Wonder Woman isn't human either. She's a creation of clay made by hera who had life breathed into her by the gods. She fundamentally doesn't understand the humans around her, and has been banished from themascera, her homeland, after stealing hera's armor.

There's a lot of potential for depth there, I think.

Except that it still basically comes down to being Superman with tig ol bitties. An 'alien' stuck in our world.

Doctor Thunder wrote:
She's a creation of clay.....

Sounds like Lohan's acting abilities.

There's a lot of potential for depth there, I think.

not so much.

Ahtman wrote:An 'alien' stuck in our world.

Doesn't that describe about half of the DC cast of superheroes anyway?

Doctor Thunder wrote:

Ahtman wrote:An 'alien' stuck in our world.

Doesn't that describe about half of the DC cast of superheroes anyway?

Probably more than that, but it also describes the majority of the DC universe that will never see a movie made about them, unlike Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman. Selling something to a comic book audience and selling something to a mass audience for film is another. I'm referring to how the latter would view it.

My middle brother should play Spike.

Seriously.

That being said, and seen the direction that Hollywood takes with it's movies, I expect the end to be radically different because they want to be accessible to everyone; they'll also show a kid Spike being bitten by a Dog, bitten by a Cat, dumped (and bitten) by Girlfriend, while being kicked (and bitten) by all the kids in the block, in order to explain his "hate" for said each of them.

Really, Hollywood's biggest problem is that they don't understand they don't have to show *everything*, they don't have to explain *everything*. Leave it to the watcher to figure it out, though given their target audience (i.e. anyone but the fans) they'd probably be at a loss.

So instead of a Donnie Darko-esque cult movie they'll make a money grabbing "Uwe Boll" flick that shows a unidimensional main character who has a bad attitude but! you'll realize near the end of the movie he's actually a very nice guy who helped old ladies cross the street and can work out a smile and actually likes the girl. They kiss, it ends.

I kinda understand now why they picked Keanu the Reaver.

i agree with some of HBMCs points about the film, however i just have strong reservations, i just seems like Hollywood are enjoying taking peoples childhoods, distorting them so badly to make an hour and half movie "£$%%ing all over the fans etc

to take a perfect example, look at the trailer for the Legend of Zelda movie, i died inside a little when i saw this, they should have learnt with Super Mario Bros, Nintendo games do not make good movies, so why spoil the games?

I know it is the vulture-like concept that offends everyone. Still, what can you do except take the ultimate vengeance of not buying a ticket? And stop all your friends and relatives from going either.

Money is the only language Hollywood understands.

LMAO at anime fans thinking Hollywood just became scavengers.

Money has been the only thing they've cared about forever. They've insulted and raped material THOUSANDS of times better than Cowboy Bebop. They've besmirched Abraham Lincoln, World War II, Dostoevsky, the French Revolution, Jesus Christ, and the mentally challenged.

Explain why a specific Japanese artform should be off-limits? Or how this is a change from the last 7 decades?

They turned Lord of the Rings INTO A CARTOON.

So turn down the indignation please. Cwoboy Bebop isn't above being carved up for mainstream audiences any more or less than James Patterson or Stephen King.

Actually, Cowboy beebop could very well be considered high art. Just because its animated you dismiss it. The writing, concept, and story line stacks up against most classics. But i understand 96. You probably wouldn't get New Orleans or the blues either.

None of these shows are made for arts sake, same goes for film. They are made to generate revenue. The same goes for the Blues and New Orleans travel industry. 'Hollywood' isn't making art films for small audiences, they are making broad products for a broad audience. It isn't just their fault either, it is as much as the audiences fault. They make crap, we buy it.

From Aaron Sorkin:
"It's important to remember that, first and foremost, if not only, this is entertainment. "The West Wing" isn't meant to be good for you. We're not telling anyone to eat their vegetables, and we do not consider it important in the sense that you're saying...Our responsibility is to captivate you for however long we've asked for your attention. That said, there is tremendous drama to be gotten from the great, what you would say, heavy issues."

dienekes96 wrote:LMAO at anime fans thinking Hollywood just became scavengers.

Money has been the only thing they've cared about forever. They've insulted and raped material THOUSANDS of times better than Cowboy Bebop. They've besmirched Abraham Lincoln, World War II, Dostoevsky, the French Revolution, Jesus Christ, and the mentally challenged.

Explain why a specific Japanese artform should be off-limits? Or how this is a change from the last 7 decades?

They turned Lord of the Rings INTO A CARTOON.

So turn down the indignation please. Cwoboy Bebop isn't above being carved up for mainstream audiences any more or less than James Patterson or Stephen King.

At the time, Lord of the Rings was only possible as a cartoon. And it was a good attempt at it.

It isn't about Japanese art being off-limits, it's just that it puts people off from the original piece. If the movie is crap, why would you bother watching the anime? Being quite an interesting series (though I found your examples for "thousands of times better" amusing ) I find it sad that it will have a black spot over it because they were lazy enough not to think things through (and apply a thousand clichés), to be unimaginative enough to put a questionable soundtrack by every artist that is popular atm (though in this aspect the Spawn OST far surpasses the movie), and took enough liberties with the story to make it downright unrecognizeable from the original work. I think you'd find people protesting over other forms of art (literature, etc) if this similar case was appliable. Constantine, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, and many others were lazy excuses for money making. But money making isn't the only thing, and I wouldn't have anything against it if at least we got something of value and significance.

Then you have some cases of people really working to produce something that has an impact, even if it differs from the original work, and gathers curiosity towards the books. Blade Runner made me read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, I also thought that the LotR movies brought the books back into a spotlight, the Golden Compass wasn't all that bad, I've yet to read the Prestige but I've been told the book is as good as the movie, the new Batman dispenses introductions, etc. These are instances where relatively known/ well known books were adapted, not for the sole purpose of "money making" but also for the artistic possibilities, and were good enough on their own to generate interest (and further income) over the time (not so much for the GC, but oh well).

I think you can actually adapt something into the silver screen that has the same economic success as an half-arsed attempt, and still conserve it's cultural value, or even add to it.

Destrado wrote:But money making isn't the only thing, and I wouldn't have anything against it if at least we got something of value and significance.

You can do that, but people invest in movies on the hope that they will make something in return. If one is lucky, occasionally you can make something combines both art and commercial success. "Message" movies tend not to have as large and audience but are still expected to turn a profit.

Now something like Cowboy Bebop is going to cost more to make and thus require greater financing thus it is going to need a larger audience to recoup the costs. Of course the people involved in making it think they are making something of value beyond mere profit, and we can hope that it delivers something more, but in the end that isn't why it is being made.

Destrado wrote:Then you have some cases of people really working to produce something that has an impact, even if it differs from the original work, and gathers curiosity towards the books

LA Confidential is another good transition from book to film.

Fight Club

Except the ending. And the whole formula thing.

There might be other stuff. Oh yeah, how they meet.

Still captures the spirit of the book, even though it's a bit more joyful
than the book.

Excellent points to both Destrado and Ahtman. This discussion just reminded me of recent Firefly tantrums. Way better shows have been treated way worse. I'm sorry Firefly was cancelled, but it's ratings sucked, and this is business.

Look, you can make art out of anything. If you had told me I would love the film Speed Racer (which is based on a cartoon I never cared for), I'd have laughed in your face. Which leads me to...

focusedfire wrote:Actually, Cowboy beebop could very well be considered high art. Just because its animated you dismiss it. The writing, concept, and story line stacks up against most classics. But i understand 96. You probably wouldn't get New Orleans or the blues either.

What in the "h" "e" double hockey sticks are you talked about? Did you even read my post? Let me address your reply in parts:

1) I specifically referred to anime as a Japanese artform. I joked about anime earlier (mocking the thread title, probably started by someone who paid for a Transformers movie ticket), but I respect that it is an artform. So, by all means, read the words I made the effort to type before responding.

2) Are you ACTUALLY equating a genre anime series (even if it's a great one) with the entire artform of jazz or a city with the cultural and historical significance of New Orleans? Perspective...look into it.

3) I love "cartoons". I own almost every Disney and Pixar film, Samurai Jack, every DC animated series (Superman, Batman:TAS, Justice League), and quite a bit of Tom and Jerry.

4) I'm open to the idea that Cowboy Bebop could be a great story. I've heard good things about it, and not just from douchy otaku geeks with limited worldviews. But it is still a combination of other genres and ideas, like Star Wars or The Matrix. Nothing wrong with that. But...

5) You need to either read more, watch more, or think more. Define high art or classic? Hamlet is a classic. A Christmas Carol is a classic. The Godfather is a classic.

And high art

High art is subjective, so I'll share my opinion and a few examples. High art is art that transcends its medium and traditional analysis mechanisms. Wagner's Ring of the Nibelung is high art. It predated psychology, but informed it. It is bigger than it's genre or medium. It is still researched and debated today. Rodin's sculptures are high art. They literally inform the human condition. The Sistine Chapel and the Pieta are high art. Mozart's symphonies are high art. Believe it or not, the work of Mark Twain is high art. The Bible is high art. Rembrandt is high art.

Feel free to google.

Lastly, Hollywood is more than capable of works that equal or better Cowboy Bebop. It all depends on the who (and that means the director and the screenwriters...not the actors). You get Ridley Scott, you are in business. You get Stephen Sommers, Van Helsing.

So spare me the otaku outrage, ff.