Is this the movie that started it all?
-
war-path — 11 years ago(August 03, 2014 07:41 PM)
Actually, no, but I see why you thought that.
Oh ok. Thanks.
Men In Black was owned by Marvel when the film came out, that is why I credited it to Marvel, b/c it was their property.
Men In Black was originally created by Lowell Cunningham who had his work released under Aircel Comics back in 1990. Marvel didn't come into the picture until a couple of years later when it had bought out Malibu Comics after they acquired Aircel Comics. In such short amount of time, the movie was already being produced and released in 1997. It was successful but no matter what, the movie wasn't really something definitive for Marvel to go by, given what I already mentioned. Just cuz it was one of their properties doesn't mean they were authentically from Marvel comics with lots of history and association to Marvel.
Blade and the Nightstalkers and the rest of his vampire hunting team from Tomb of Dracula had been around since the 70's before Blade saw his 1998 feature length movie. Blade was being updated and showcased quite prominently in the early to mid 90's and he even made a guest appearance in the 90's Spider-Man Animated Series. Surely it was still Blade that Marvel owed it's success to, not so much the Men in Black. -
Times_Up — 11 years ago(August 04, 2014 10:04 AM)
I don't know that the history and association matters so much, but it may. No question Blade was important and was more of a superhero movie anyway. Regardless, Stan Lee, in the Blade special features, mentions the 89 Batman movie and the 90 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie as saving Marvel b/c they got people back in the shops buying comics including Marvel inspite of not having a hit movie.
Steadfast he opened his mouth, but nothing came out. What a wash out. -
war-path — 11 years ago(August 04, 2014 07:49 PM)
I don't know that the history and association matters so much, but it may. No question Blade was important and was more of a superhero movie anyway.
I guess it's subjective but I feel that Blade is still more deserving of such credit than MIB because Blade was created by Gene Colan and Marv Woflman for Marvel comics from the very beginning of his debut in the Tomb of Dracula comics. MIB was never created under Marvel comics from their very first appearance back in 1990. Considering Blade and MIB have the concepts of the paranormal and occultism in common, even the protagonists wearing sunglasses and wearing black attire and fighting in secrecy where the general public is unaware of, if Marvel wanted to do something like the MIB, they would've already done it like the Tomb of Dracula comic series. That took an existing folklore(vampires and the cinematic horror version of Count Dracula) and adapted it into it's own Universe creating a new spin on things here and there. MIB didn't have that since it was first published by Aircel, an independent company unlike Marvel who is a commercially well known comic book company.
Regardless, Stan Lee, in the Blade special features, mentions the 89 Batman movie and the 90 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie as saving Marvel b/c they got people back in the shops buying comics including Marvel inspite of not having a hit movie.
I wonder where he says that because from whatever of the special features I'm able to see of Blade, I don't remember seeing him say anything like that. Batman 1989 and even the first TMNT live action movie were beneficial to the comic book industry in general for pretty much what you stated. It's no coincidence that X-Men TAS was released right around the same time Batman TAS also premiered in 1992.
But I think your mentioning of MIB is very fascinating and I never realized how you may be onto something. You did bring up a very good point. -
leyenda61 — 11 years ago(September 06, 2014 09:48 PM)
I've often felt Blade & its creative team never got the credit they deserved. Kirk Petrucelli did such a fantastic job with the props. Norrington just knocked it out of the park. Goyer wrote a fantastic script (this was before he sold out). Snipes basically took Shaft into the stratosphere. It was awesome seeing the actor do so much of his choreography. And let's not forget the awesome blue filter the night scenes were shot with. I could go on & on.
Sent from my 13 year old P.O.S. Desktop -
Ray_Tango — 11 years ago(October 23, 2014 08:13 PM)
Yes. The success of this film and its aesthetics ushered in a new movement. Unfortunately, it would be the first and last comic book film to truly redefine comic book films. The rest have paled in comparison. Not one of them, in their combined double digit hours of running time, have come close to providing the refreshing excitement of "Blood Bath".
Action Hero's Anthem -
MonoEnojado — 10 years ago(February 27, 2016 11:52 AM)
Definitely. Before Blade, Marvel had effectively tried to make it in the big screen, but they had no success whatsoever, neither critically nor commercially. Blade was the movie that paved the way for future Marvel films.
It's good to bring this up, because after all the success Marvel movies are having these days, most people are not aware that they should thank Blade for it. -
generationofswine — 9 years ago(November 21, 2016 08:56 PM)
I'd give that to the X-Men.
Blade was made in 98, and despite Tomb of Dracula, The Nightstalkers, and a short lived solo series, he wasn't exactly hugely popular.
At the most we were expecting a sequel, not much more. The X-Men was when the franchises really started.
"Few people understand the psychology of dealing with a highway traffic cop."
