Robot 6

Tony Scott to direct Millar and McNiven’s Nemesis adaptation

Nemesis

Nemesis

The news that writer Mark Millar teased earlier this week has finally, officially broke — Tony Scott, director of The Last Boy Scout, Top Gun, Man on Fire and True Romance, will direct the movie adaptation of Millar and Steve McNiven’s Nemesis, their creator-owned title published under Marvel’s Icon banner.

“As you can imagine, I’m more than excited,” Millar wrote on the Millarworld forums. “Steve is delirious and this puts our books instantly in an entirely different league in Hollywood terms. Tony said this was a very timely project and Fox want to get this moving as soon as possible. Next up is a script and the writer we talked about did one of my top five movies of all time. The actor he’s shooting for as the lead character is going to blow your socks off.”

According to Deadline Hollywood, the rights were acquired by 20th Century Fox, and the film will be produced by Scott Free Productions.

News From Our Partners

Comments

32 Comments

Hope they don’t screw this up the way they did with Kick-Ass.
No jet-packs!!!

Congrats to McNiven and Millar this is huge news for them!

Tom Fitzpatrick

August 7, 2010 at 11:51 am

Well, damn ….. I wonder just HOW faithful they’re going to be to the source materials. ;-)

oh mark millar… you’ll just never quit, will you?

also, what’s up with making all these comics into movies before they’re even done being made as comics!!!!! scott pilgrim is the only exception ’cause it is freaking awesome and i’m biased >.>

I can’t hate on Mark Millar. He’s doing what he loves, and he’s making big Hollywood movies out of them like clockwork.

I sure hope they change the costume, cause the current one is quite unimaginative.

Oh great, maybe the next issue will come out for Easter.

And the last will come one month before the movie starts.

Why?

I bet we all wish we could put out lesser comic book works and get movie deals, huh?

‘I quit.’

That’s a terible line for ending. Who wrote that again?

Hi everyone.
Before I begin, let me say that I’m not stating Millar is a bad writer. I’ve enjoyed some of his works, but never THAT much. I simply don’t see him as the genius many seem to think he is. So can you please explain to a fellow comic-reader:

- Why is Mark Millar considered an author worth spending so much time talking about? That is, what are his skills and qualities as a writer supposed to be? And why is he more talked-about than many other excellent writers in the industry?

- Why does Hollywood seem to think “Nemesis” should be a better choice as a comic to adapt right now than – say – Busiek’s fantastic “Arrowsmith” or anything by Ennis?

- And why-oh-why is he even considered “controversial” (in the positive meaning of the word)? Can you even be actually “controversial” if you do it for shock value’s own sake?

- What’s so innovative about Wanted? “Eminem”‘s finger at the end? Oh, no. Villains winning in the end?

- What’s so thought-provoking about Kick-Ass? A kid playing with fire? A murdering little girl spewing normal words commonly known as profanities?

- What’s so new about Nemesis? A BAD BATMAN?

- What’s so interesting about Old Man Logan? A Dark Knight Returns redux? With venomized dinosaurs? Obviously, were I younger, I’d find the concept fun. And I can find it amusing today. But that’s all.

- One more thing? Who among you actually thinks Millar’s the liberal he paints himself to be? And who, instead, thinks he’s actually quite far to the right? It’s not that I actually care, but I’m quite curious about the way other readers place him politically.

This said, I’m not judging anyone who likes Millar. I just want to understand what people find in him.
Best regards,
Grendel

This is ridiculous. Tony Scott is wasting his time. Nemisis hasn’t had much in the way of good reviews. Who does Millar have dirty pictures of in Hollywood?

This shit is gonna be so bomb. Y’all mad haterish.

@Grendel. Its because its not really Hollywood calling. The films are mostly European productions..with American Distributor deals. Notice how most of the directors, actors and crew for Miller’s films are usually European not American. These films are made low cost..and cashing in. And they tout the US as being a morally poor country–which gets a lot of peoples rocks off.

Reginald VelJohnson

August 7, 2010 at 3:22 pm

You can tell he wrote Nemesis directly for the movies, so good for him I guess. Another “creator” making a hell of a profit off the exploitation of the comic book genre. Nothing new there.

Van GoghX: How did they screw up Kick-Ass? That was a highly entertaining film made with real quality. It’s R rating sure hurt its chances of financial success, but I’d rate that highly.

As for Nemesis, we’ll see. Not as impressed with this series as I was with Kick-Ass.

“also, what’s up with making all these comics into movies before they’re even done being made as comics!!!!! scott pilgrim is the only exception ’cause it is freaking awesome and i’m biase”

With Marvel doing their own movies and being bought by Disney and Time Warner holding onto the DC catalog there’s not a lot of superhero properties for the taking. So you see stuff like Nemesis and Youngblood being snatched up by studios.

So it’s cool that a director he really likes is doing the movie, but I don’t really see how this is bigger than most (maybe all) of the things he listed.

Grant Morrison should get residuals since Nemesis is the most blatant Prometheus ripoff of all time. Millar swipes again.

Gonna discuss Grendel’s questions. Just wanted to say I’m not a giant fan of Millar’s either, I like most of his stuff though.

- Why is Mark Millar considered an author worth spending so much time talking about?: People like the guy, his books sell well and attract an audience. There are articles and things written about other writers too, but most are not as popular as him, so he gets the hits and page views. His skills and qualities, well I guess that would be subjective, but people buy his books which is the best quality to have in a business like this.

- Why does Hollywood seem to think “Nemesis” should be a better choice as a comic to adapt right now than – say – Busiek’s fantastic “Arrowsmith” or anything by Ennis?: It’s all about who you know and who knows you. Millar got his foot into the door with Wanted — other things as well, but that made it all the way to the big screen first. So movies based on his work so far have done well (I don’t think either Wanted or Kick-Ass were blockbusters, but still did very well), which people in Hollywood would take notice of. Arrowsmith might be a fantastic movie, but it’s a bigger gamble than Nemesis.

- And why-oh-why is he even considered “controversial” (in the positive meaning of the word)?: I don’t know how to answer this one, I don’t remember much controversy over his stuff other than when Levitz made him change stuff around in the Authority. He’s a good hypeman though, and gets people talking about his books and movies, it probably stems from that.

- What’s so innovative about Wanted?/ What’s so thought-provoking about Kick-Ass?/What’s so new about Nemesis?/What’s so interesting about Old Man Logan?: I lumped these together because these questions are sort of silly. I don’t recall anyone saying any of these things, they’re just entertaining stories. If you don’t find them entertaining I understand that, but to the best of my knowledge none of them claimed to be particularly deep.

Not bothering with the last question for my sanity’s sake.

“Grant Morrison should get residuals since Nemesis is the most blatant Prometheus ripoff of all time. Millar swipes again.”

Evil variations on Batman have been around for ages. You have the Wrath, Blackmask, Owlman, The Reaper, Bane, Catman, etc, etc. And there’s been similar costumed criminal masterminds like Fantomas, Kriminal, Diabolik, and Grendel in pulps and other comics.

I don’t think Nemesis is good but this type of character has been around for a while. It’s pretty much a stock character at this point.

Anti-batmen are villains who borrow heavily from Batman, either in style, background or M-O. Many characters have been created with this purpose. The term “Anti-Batman” is also often applied to villains who mirror one classic Batman aspect, but pervert it in some way.

Nemesis is not just a new anti-batman, he is what happen when a psychopathic villain whose body count is sky-scraping (let’s say the Joker for instance) wind up with Batman’s mind and skill (well, to be able to hijack Air Force One while it is flying, you have to have his skill).

So any old crap that Millar farts out gets a movie deal now?

This is just unreal, I feel like I’ve stepped into someone elses fantasy, and it feels gross

At this point I wonder if Millar even writes comics to write comics anymore, or if he’s writing them so they’ll get picked up by a studio where he’ll make the fat cash.

I don’t get it. Is this hate some of you had directed at Millar for living his life and pursuing his goals of making a movie? Is it that he seems to be able to get films made a lot easier than other writers? Is it that he doesn’t seem to write comics out of the love for the medium?

I wouldn’t be surprised if Millar keeps going about things the way he does because he wants another chance to write Superman or to make a Superman film, which nobody at WB or DC seems interested in. What better way to show them that they can have faith in his creative abilities than by making a successful “superhero” film?

Seriously, DC should just give him a go on Brave and the Bold or Superman/Batman.

Your questions were already answered rather well by Bryan but I’ll take a shot.

” Why is Mark Millar considered an author worth spending so much time talking about? That is, what are his skills and qualities as a writer supposed to be? And why is he more talked-about than many other excellent writers in the industry?”

His skills and qualities as a writer are dependent on the reader/viewer of his material. It’s all subjective, as is the work of pretty much every creator in the industry. Believe it or not there are some people that don’t find Watchmen to be the pinnacle of comicbook storytelling. Just like how some people actually find the work that Loeb’s done in Hulk to be highly entertaining.

“Why does Hollywood seem to think “Nemesis” should be a better choice as a comic to adapt right now than – say – Busiek’s fantastic “Arrowsmith” or anything by Ennis?”

The difference is that Millar probably actively pursues having his work made into film. As for Ennis, there’s been talk of a Preacher series for years although the subject matter is incredibly touchy and I’m pretty sure the Boys is getting a film treatment.

“And why-oh-why is he even considered “controversial” (in the positive meaning of the word)? Can you even be actually “controversial” if you do it for shock value’s own sake?”

I don’t think Millar really does stuff to be controversial. He probably genuinely thinks it gives the most bang for what he’s writing. Besides, it gets people talking about the work. I always saw people complain about Civil War and how horrible it was and how Steve and Tony would’ve been on the same side. Nevertheless, the book continued to do well in sales. They may not have been the most consistent but it was at the top of the chart every time.

“What’s so innovative about Wanted? “Eminem”‘s finger at the end? Oh, no. Villains winning in the end?”

One correction, the villains had already won by the time the story started IIRC.

“What’s so thought-provoking about Kick-Ass? A kid playing with fire? A murdering little girl spewing normal words commonly known as profanities?”

I don’t know if Kick-Ass was ever meant to be thought-provoking or does every good comic story have to really be thought-provoking? Most of my favorite stories in the medium were purely about providing entertainment. And really most superhero stories aren’t thought-provoking, yet they’re always the best selling comics EVEN IF quality declines.

“What’s so new about Nemesis? A BAD BATMAN?”

Nothing’s new about it really. It’s something that’s been done thousands of times, and really what story hasn’t been told in comics, more specifically the costumed kind? I haven’t been following Nemesis as I have no interest in a story like that.

“What’s so interesting about Old Man Logan? A Dark Knight Returns redux? With venomized dinosaurs? Obviously, were I younger, I’d find the concept fun. And I can find it amusing today. But that’s all.”

Enjoy it for what it is then.

My problem with what you’re saying is you seem to be suggesting for a comic to really be good it has to have a deeper meaning and teach us something about ourselves and the nature of human beings. I’d disagree. Comics don’t have to do anything like that, that’s why they hadn’t for decades. Even after stories like Watchmen and DKR, comics continued to be about escapist fantasy – soaring higher than our limited lives can take us. You may disagree but I don’t read comics to learn about who I am. I read them for the pretty picture. :P

My problem with Kick Ass was it just seemed too campy on screen. The comics seemed more gritty and real than the movie. By the end of the movie it didnt feel like it couldve taken place in the real world. I think the comics left enough realism in it to not seem campy

Millar is all about shock value, seeing how much he can get away with before someone gets offended. The thing about Hollywood is chances are someone’s done something just as shocking in a movie before. This is the reason Wanted just seemed stupid…well that and they screwed up the plot.

This is in the same way that Tarantino’s movies could never have successful comic adaptations. I’m not comparing Tarantino to Millar, no no that would be an insult to Tarantino. But they treat shock value the same way.

MAD HATER-ISH, ALL Y’ALL

Cry about it.

Sure, anti-Batman characters have existed since he has (Killer Moth springs to mind) and you could probably almost argue any of his rogues are anti-batmans but if you read Prometheus’s initial one-shot and JLA storyline it’s difficult not to see what a swipe Nemesis is.

I much preferred Grant Morrison’s use of the Owlman character in JLA: Earth2 to Millar’s use of Owlman in this Nemesis book.

Millar is very very good at what I’d call “milking” a concept. He’ll take a mildly original idea (villains take over! what if real people tried to be superheroes! Super bad guy!” and adds enough semi-entertaining dialogue and decent plotting to fill out a miniseries, then hunts down super-talented artists to make the stories almost worth reading, for me.

Sigh. My point is, if you gave a Millar story idea to a better writer, they could turn it into a masterpiece on par with Marvelman or Dark Knight Returns. His scripts are so bare-bones that in the hands of lesser collaborators, his stories would be dismissed as blindly provocative garbage.

My opinion.

the next two MILLAR projects… BAD BATMAN et CAN I REINVENT SUPERMAN… on MARVEL PRESS. ha ha.
has he a REVENGE to take with DC COMICS ? he sure hasn’t work for them in a long time.
but who is the best REVENGE director ? TONY SCOTT.
because he did REVENGE and MAN ON FIRE. ;)

and a man who can produce THE ULTIMATES, can do it again. the rest is just him playing with the biggest toys.
MILLAR is a PUNK (like ENNIS) he want to see the boat on fire then jump.
ENNIS win the praise of his pairs (after YEARS on bird shitting on his head) because he did some pretty wicked cool WAR STORIES. may be one day, MILLAR will do something like that, i’m curious about his magazine through…

what is the problem here ? that we believe MILLAR’s HYPE and we bought his last books and didn’t get want we wanted or that his work isn’t as good as he was ?

Civil War was so bad I was shocked Marvel put it out on the stands. Certainly as their game changing thing. Man, it was terrible and cost Marvel a lot of credibility.

Leave a Comment

 



Browse the Robot 6 Archives