Doc Savage (2017)

[Kromm]

Written and Directed by Shane Black. Starring The Rock.

 

Personally I don't see any way this works. First, it only works IMO as a period piece set in the 1930s. A modern "update" would be totally worthless. But even under those circumstances, will people be interested in a character with close to zero modern fanbase?

[JessePinkman]

Not to be that guy but...who asked for this?

[Perfect Xero]

On 6/5/2016 at 10:31 AM, Kromm said:

Written and Directed by Shane Black. Starring The Rock.

 

Personally I don't see any way this works. First, it only works IMO as a period piece set in the 1930s. A modern "update" would be totally worthless. But even under those circumstances, will people be interested in a character with close to zero modern fanbase?

People watch lots of movies about characters they've never heard of.

On 6/5/2016 at 10:56 PM, JessePinkman said:

Not to be that guy but...who asked for this?

Me! It's Shane Black and The Rock doing a pulp superhero!

[magicdog]

Personally, I think this is great!  My Dad and my uncle) were huge pulp fans as kids and had Doc Savage books (I think we have "The Man of Bronze" - the version that was released in '75 when the Ron Ely version of the movie was made).  It would be interesting to see it on film again, but I agree that it might not work as well setting it in the present.  I think they're looking to tap into the "popcorn movie" trend with characters that are less familiar than the current superheroes.  It would be great to expose this character to a new generation.  

 

In a sense, Doc Savage and his relatives were the first superheroes (their ancestors were exposed to a glowing meteor that crashed on Earth and it resulted in their descendants having unusually high intelligence which lead to all sorts of accomplished near superhuman people.  Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes and Natty Bumppo ("The Deerslayer") are his supposed relations.

[MarkHB]

If it means we could actually get a good Shadow movie, I'm all for it.

[Bruinsfan]

Aw, I liked the Alec Baldwin one. Where else are you going to see Ian McKellen fleeing from a runaway atomic bomb?

 

Johnson certainly has the look and action movie cred to play Doc Savage, but I'm not sure he can convince me that he's also a Renaissance Man scientific genius.

[Lugal]

I'd love to see a Doc Savage movie, but I agree it should be set in the 1930s.

14 hours ago, magicdog said:

In a sense, Doc Savage and his relatives were the first superheroes (their ancestors were exposed to a glowing meteor that crashed on Earth and it resulted in their descendants having unusually high intelligence which lead to all sorts of accomplished near superhuman people.  Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes and Natty Bumppo ("The Deerslayer") are his supposed relations.

That comes from Philip José Farmer's Wold Newton Family, and I don't know if the filmmakers would have rights to that.  Be cool if they did, though, it would be the ultimate Cinematic Universe.

[Perfect Xero]

16 hours ago, magicdog said:

Personally, I think this is great!  My Dad and my uncle) were huge pulp fans as kids and had Doc Savage books (I think we have "The Man of Bronze" - the version that was released in '75 when the Ron Ely version of the movie was made).  It would be interesting to see it on film again, but I agree that it might not work as well setting it in the present.  I think they're looking to tap into the "popcorn movie" trend with characters that are less familiar than the current superheroes.  It would be great to expose this character to a new generation.  

 

In a sense, Doc Savage and his relatives were the first superheroes (their ancestors were exposed to a glowing meteor that crashed on Earth and it resulted in their descendants having unusually high intelligence which lead to all sorts of accomplished near superhuman people.  Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes and Natty Bumppo ("The Deerslayer") are his supposed relations.

 

1 hour ago, Lugal said:

I'd love to see a Doc Savage movie, but I agree it should be set in the 1930s.

That comes from Philip José Farmer's Wold Newton Family, and I don't know if the filmmakers would have rights to that.  Be cool if they did, though, it would be the ultimate Cinematic Universe.

I haven't seen anything suggesting it'll be set in modern times, and saw one older article (from before Rock was cast) saying it would be set in the 30s.

I'd assume that the Wold Newton Family/Universe characters would be in the public domain at this point.

[MarkHB]

9 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

I'd assume that the Wold Newton Family/Universe characters would be in the public domain at this point.

Going by the sample list here, some are, but not all.  Savage and The Shadow (and probably some others no one remembers) are owned, AFAIK, by Conde Nast who bought out Street & Smith.  The Arthur Conan Doyle estate still tried to exercise some control over (or at least extort money for the use of) Sherlock Holmes, but apparently all but the last few original stories were found to be public domain in the US a couple of years ago.

Also, according to the same article, the Wold Newton Family concept was postulated by Farmer in 1972, so it's definitely protected.

[Bruinsfan]

The underpinnings of the Wold Newton shared universe could be argued to have first appeared in Farmer's A Feast Unknown in 1969. If it really became an issue at some point I think lawyers could get the copyright expiration rolled back 3 years.

[Kromm]

3 hours ago, MarkHB said:

Also, according to the same article, the Wold Newton Family concept was postulated by Farmer in 1972, so it's definitely protected.

That concept, yes.  But the poster said "Wold Newton Family/Universe characters", not the concept. I mean the actual Farmer stories are copyrighted, of course, but that only affects direct use of the content of those actual stories. The characters themselves all pre-date that and OTHER use of them which doesn't include what was specifically in the Farmer stories would be measured against the original copyright dates.

All of this is apart from Trademarking, which is a totally different thing. Trademarks can last forever.

Superman is the oft used test case a lot of people posit. There's been some legal finagling to extend those copyrights. Eventually Superman really WILL go public domain. But initially JUST the early original stories. People won't be able to magically put out their own Superman books without limits. Literally, if anyone tries to use some version of Superman, they'd have to stick to the early elements that were there in the beginning.

Getting back to Doc Savage, what Conde Nast owns is the Trademark. I can't say I'm 100% sure what rights that gives them over someone using a version of the character from stories that are, in copyright terms, in public domain. There's apparently some level of fair use of something as basic as character names, even if they are trademarked. It's apparently about brand protection--someone's in violation if their product can be unfairly confused with yours. So you have to have a similar product (in this case another movie, I'd guess). 

[bmoore4026]

I'm wondering if they're going to keep the creepy forced lobotomization thing that Doc does.  I doubt that will go over well with audiences.  For me, it's the one thing that's detracted me from the stories.  Sure, the macho manly men getting into adventures and peril and tied up is fine for me, but unwilling brain surgery and "reeducation" - that's fucked up.

[Bruinsfan]

I don't think they can do that for a modern audience if they want to present him as a hero. Maybe have him with a sideline in prison rehabilitation counseling, trade schools, and placement agencies or something.

 

Although... it is a Dwayne Johnson movie, so his Doc Savage may not have to worry about surviving crooks and pulp villains to rehabilitate.