David Goyer’s oddly named Green Arrow-goes-to-prison movie, Supermax, appears to have a new title: Green Arrow. Yes, simply Green Arrow.
That’s according to Robert Sanchez of IESB.net, who speculates on Warner Bros.’ tent-pole movies for summer 2009.
Sanchez writes: “I am hearing with the success of Marvel’s Iron Man, considered a second-tier comic book character, certain execs over Warner Bros. believe it’s the right time to introduce the world to Oliver Queen, his bag of trick arrows and green spandex.”
He says that Green Arrow, and Billy Batson and the Legend of Shazam – directed by Peter Segal and written by John August — are both contenders for 2009. Green Arrow/Supermax is written by Justin Marks (Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li).
Speaking of Segal, the article reports that the Get Smart director has been attached to a big-screen adaptation of Jonny Quest.
June 3rd, 2008 at 9:46 am
Great news about changing the name to simply “Green Arrow.” Now how about actually giving us Ollie’s backstory (the recent Year One series would make a good template) and, y’know, have him actually being GREEN ARROW instead of some guy who gets thrown into prison – without arrows, ostensibly – in just another run of the mill prison break flick?
Save the prison story, which has some merit, for a second GA movie if the first one does well.
June 3rd, 2008 at 9:49 am
It’s worth noting that every critic who comes along seems to tell us we should be bored silly by origin stories, so if a film just jumps right in with a hero, it would answer that (I think unfounded) criticism.
Still, this rumor smacks of TW desperation as they try to find a DC hero to carry a series besides Batman. And while Ollie is a good choice, and Goyer would be a good director, I think that rushing to get this made in the next year will just result in a big, noisy and empty project.
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:36 am
You know, I may be in the minority but I wouldn’t mind seeing Justin Hartley carry on the Oliver Queen role in a movie. He’s a little young but he’s got the cocky self-righteousness down pat.
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:48 am
I was just talking to someone about this last night. I want to see loads of second and third string DC villains in there, man. Easter eggs galore.
June 3rd, 2008 at 11:31 am
I agree with Shaun’s comments above about Supermax: a superhero stuck in a prison full of supervillains isn’t a bad idea, but it’s just a weird choice for a first movie. It could still work, though. Acquaint the moviegoing crowd with Ollie before throwing him into prison with a short origin tale, or just sprinkle flashbacks to his origin throughout the movie, and it could actually create a fresh, novel take on the narrative format of origins in superhero movies.
June 3rd, 2008 at 11:44 am
This reminds me of that I’m a Marvel/DC video, maybe the first or second one, about all of these DC speculations/announcements but rare follow-through. Not trying to be a downer, I really want to see these movies made, but something keeps stopping that from happening.
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
I’m so there.
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Maybe its me but whats wrong with Green Lantern as a movie?
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:18 pm
A GA film has possibilities, but this whole Supermax thing sounds like a terrible idea.
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
I really hope they scrap the “Supermax” idea. I never found it particularly interesting and it really has nothing to do with the Green Arrow character. It’s got “gigantic waste” written all over it.
A straight up Green Arrow movie that combines his origin (hopefully the GA: Year One version) with some genreal urban vigilantism could be a huge hit. I think people would really dig a modern Robin Hood story.
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:22 pm
i like forward to the eventual notice from WBs that the project is canned.
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Thanks, Safraz… You make a good point about how the GA/”Supermax” film could redefine the “comic book movie” in some ways. It would indeed be a very different approach. I just think WB/DC would be better off establishing the character first and making him someone the audience cares about before throwing him in prison and all.
I go back to the recent GA: Year One because, while it’s an origin story, it’s still a pretty offbeat one. Once you get past the drunken, carefree playboy stuff it’s (based on Year One) a guy left for dead and washed up on an island, who has only his wits and skill with a bow and arrow in order to survive. And there are bigger stakes than that once he discovers what’s happening on that island. Fleshed out a bit, it could be a great movie. It’s not another costumed urban vigilante story.
To Nestor: Nothing wrong at all with a GL movie… Hasn’t there been word here recently that there is a GL film now in development? I read that shortly after word that the JLA movie was (thankfully) being sh*tcanned.
June 3rd, 2008 at 12:52 pm
I thought the Supermax thing looked like a really good idea actually – a plot-based superhero movie rather than an origin-oriented first one (which is surely becoming a superhero movie cliché by this point?).
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Hey Artie,How will i spam your inbox in the new ‘rama knowing there isn’t a PM-System?
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Tom Daylight, how can an origin movie, for the first of hopefully multiple films, be considered cliche. How else are we going to learn about the character. By the way, anticipating the response, if you have flashbacks to how the character started for a large part of the movie, it is still an origin movie.
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
The Supermax is a good idea, but it’s not a good showcase for an established character. Besides, isn’t that a bit used in the upcoming film, Hancock, though the title character isn’t imprisoned with meta-felons?
After the Justice League snafu, I think WB should wait and enjoy the “Watchmen” buzz.
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
How do people learn about characters in film without origins? Character moments, exposition, flashbacks, etc. You know, using all the storytelling devices that are available.
Let’s be honest. Green Arrow’s origin is not the most interesting in the world. Robinson Crusoe meets Robin Hood basically. He’s not only derivative of Batman. Tossing him right into the middle of a plot is a great way to downplay the derivative elements and emphasize what makes him unique, his personality, character, and politics. Not to mention, when was the last superhero movie where the hero was a true underdog, totally outmatched in power and numbers?
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Who cares about this Supermax crap. What I’d like to see is Justin Hartley in a Green Arrow TV series. Why should the movie people have all the fun?
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:05 pm
I love the idea of a Green Arrow movie, but I think “Supermax” is the wrong way to introduce the character. It’s a great idea for a second or third movie though.
I know Matt Damon is a name that has been bandied about…and he would be great. But I also love the idea of Justin Hartley doing the role…not necessarily as a continuation of Smallville, but as a new interpretation.
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Justin Hartley is not a good actor, even for the rather less stringent standards of the action genre.
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Though you have a good point, Evil Twin (post #17), you inadvertantly also prove why Queen is an unique character that putting into an “big odds” plot only obscures him than enhances him.
Sure his origin’s Robinson Crusoe meets Robin Hood, but Queen’s a man of capitalism who becomes a man of the people.
Besides, why put a normal man in a prison with a bunch of meta-felons (“Hancock” has the opposite). I’m a fledging screenwriter, BTW.
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Re: Post 21
How Oliver Queen learned to shoot a bow and arrow has almost nothing to do with his motivation.
And, anyways, the described plot encompasses more of Green Arrow than a straightforward origin movie where he may have one villain crammed into the second half. With this plot, Green Arrow gets to fight supervillains, corporate villains, AND the government. If that doesn’t sum up his mission, without having to spell it out through clumsy exposition, nothing does.
Not to mention, there’s a real element of danger to the scenario. Every fight Oliver Queen will be seemingly outmatched. This is not Wolverine taking on random soldiers, Batman taking on muggers, Iron Man fighting terrorists with small arms, or Superman taking on bank robbers, but fights where the hero likely should get beat. That’s rare in a genre that seems to love the overdog. Turning Oliver Queen into a true underdog is a great way to sell him as the everyman/man of the people superhero.
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
As somone who had the misfortune to sit through Justin Hartley’s CW Pilot “Austin Golden Hour” can I just voice a ‘Dear God, No!’ comment for him not to be the Big Screen Green Arrow. On the plus side I am happy to see Green Arrow make the jump to the big screen, although I’d be much happier if someone could sort Wonder Woman out soon.
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:47 pm
How about DC/WB execs learn from Marvel and throw in a lot of references/set ups for individual movies, leading to a JL movie? Take some time with these properties to do them some “justice”.
Ha! I made a funny!
June 3rd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Evil Twin (#22): He is AN UNDERDOG. He isn’t a SUPERHERO (no powers).
And where the (bleep) did you ever read about me posting about the bow and arrow being part of the motivation?! You got to read a little carefully, man!!! Jesus on a bike!!!
June 3rd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
A lack of superpowers doesn’t make a character an underdog. Batman isn’t an underdog, especially when he drives around in armored vehicles. Sherlock Holmes isn’t an underdog. Nor is James Bond. Going up against overwhelming odds makes you an underdog.
And, if you weren’t implying that his origin wasn’t tied to a “capitalist becoming a man of the people” then please explain. Logically, how does getting marooned make a person become a superhero?
And, I’ll stand by the idea that Green Arrow needs a good story hook for a movie. People have seen Cast Away and read Robinson Crusoe. And they’ve seen Robin Hood. Running a straight origin story is going to end up with people shrugging, “seen that, already”. It’s vital that Green Arrow get to enough unique stuff in the first movie to sell him as an interesting and unique character.
June 3rd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Actually, Evil Twin, I found the newest version of GA’s origin (say it with me: “Year One”) to be quite interesting. No, it didn’t reinvent the wheel or anything (but neither did the Iron Man movie, and look how people love it) but it was a bit different from the usual origin tale, and it does double duty of actually telling a whole story in and of itself. He’s never really “Green Arrow” until the very end, after returning back home.
I think it would be a great basis for a first film. No messy exposition, no shoehorning a villain in, just a complete, action-packed story that lays the groundwork for a costumed adventure in the second movie (if they choose to go that way), or else establish the character for the “Supermax” story.
As someone else suggested, the prison break might even make a better third film. But that’s putting the cart before the horse, I guess. I just think the movie isn’t likely to catch on with the masses, ala Iron Man, unless you establish Oliver Queen and his background at the start.
June 3rd, 2008 at 3:50 pm
I’m in the “lead with your best” camp. For every Iron Man, there’s a superhero movie that doesn’t get to do a “three movie epic” because it fails to catch on with the general public enough.
There’s more than one way to fill in the audience than a step by step origin (and my understanding is that the movie covers the basics of his origin, albeit in abbreviated form). Especially one that’s derivative. And we’ve seen expert archers on film before, unlike Iron Man which got to dazzle us with special effects.
One of the reasons that The Punisher has struggled to make the transition to the screen is that we’ve seen armed vigilantes before on screen and only the skull iconography is unique. Death Wish springs most readily to mind. Green Arrow has to avoid appearing derivative to stand a chance at the box office.
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
True enough, Evil Twin, but I don’t think the Y1 story, with a guy washed up on an island and having to save himself, as well as an enslaved population from a massive drug cartel, is derivative of any films I’ve seen recently. It might have similarities to other films out there, but here’s a “superhero” origin story that takes a different approach then most of the others. Most notably, no costume or urban jungle adventures (not until the obligatory glamour shot at the end of the film).
I dunno. I think the jail break has some potential too, perhaps, but I don’t see it as “lead with your best” if you’re going for a mass audience. Imagine if the first film with Tony Stark had him framed for espionage after his armor and weapons are stolen, and he’s thrown in the slammer with a bunch of obscure Marvel villains. But we never really get much background on the guy or any adventures in the armor. Would Marvel still have the biggest film of the year, so far? I doubt it.
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
that’s great they re changing the title, from supermax, to just green arrow. Now the question who will play him, bets, are for me one tree hill star Chad Michael Murray.
he always got a face of
archer.
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:22 pm
The Supermax idea is ok. I’m just not sure if the character is going to catch on with audiences. I’m thinking more about the violence / protective Mommy segment out there, but I guess if Wolverine can get by, then so can Ollie.
Hopefully we’ll see Dinah too.
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:43 pm
How in the hell is Iron Man a second-tier character? who else besides Spidey does MArvel consider an A-lister??
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:45 pm
The idea is great, but the roster of villains as reported by Latino Review was such a letdown. They need to put villains I’ve heard of in there to get me excited about this.
February 17th, 2011 at 3:21 am
There is a complete sub-market in the field of the mobile phone market location connected to the jailbreak or unlocking of the cellular phones so that they can be employed on any cellular network, and current Supreme Court decisions in the USA handed down have confirmed that the jailbreak market is legal and legitimate. That is, end-person consumers are fairly inside of their legal rights to do what they desire to their mobile cellphone handset to enable the telephone to do the job on other network carriers which is typically identified as jailbreak or unlocking the network block.
Learn how to Jailbreak your iPhone