Damon Lindelof Accusations, Echo in Trouble, Little Mermaid Flops, Charlie Cox on She-Hulk, and the Writer's Strike

J. J. Abrams' acolyte and talentless hack Damon Lindelof has been hit with a long expose that accuses him of racism and sexism during the production of Lost (2004-10), the show that should have ended mystery boxes but instead shoved them into everything else. I have no love for Lindelof, but unfortunately for those making these accusations they come at a time where this is so common my immediate reaction is doubt and suspicion. The stories are dated, so why put them out now? And if Lindelof has these inclinations, where are the accusations from his other productions? Is Vanity Fair claiming sexism and racism are easily sloughed off? I don't think fear of reprisals can be used as an excuse for silence since for the last five years the industry has been very open to them (and Lindelof's career has been on a downward arc during that period). This feels out of place after Lindelof efforts like the laughable Watchman (2019), whose reason d'etre was representation with a female lead (Wizards of the Coast really missed out with Aragorn, who shouldn't just be black, but also female). I believe the reason we're getting this story now is the industry wants to wash their hands of him, but because he has powerful friends they need justification (like the hamfisted excuses Marvel used to dump worthless executive Victoria Alonso, cf). Lindelof has barely produced anything over the last five years and hasn't had a true success since Lost. I have no idea if Lindelof was an actual bully or made racist or sexist comments, but validity aside, if the industry wants him to go away, I'm all for it.

As an aside, there are a lot of thematic similarities between this situation and what happened to Joss Whedon (specifically from Ray Fisher in regards to Justice League). By now it's accepted that Fisher's claims are at best overblown (that doesn't require you to believe the Zack Snyder conspiracy theory, although Zack is petty enough to make it plausible); but even the general accusations aimed at Whedon came long after the events themselves and are still controversial--so few people have come forward and the corroborating evidence is not strong (nor has it been tested in court), very unlike his self-admitted infidelities. This isn't a James Franco situation where the perpetrator admits what they did (Whedon's paramours, unlike Franco, have never accused him of wrong doing).

Credible rumour suggests Disney+ show Echo was such a mess that Marvel was forced to re-shoot most or all of it, and may cut down the episode count (form the original plan of eight, similar to what Netflix did to Witcher: Blood Origin). This fits with D+ changing course by dumping it all in one day (Netflix-style), something they've never done before. This is yet another IP no one asked for (which, like She-Hulk, will also feature Daredevil) and you have to wonder just how many failures like this can happen before Disney oligarch Bob Iger is in trouble. Speaking of Disney....

I don't care about The Little Mermaid one way or another (other than the original fairy tale from Hans Christian Andersen). The animated original is the last Disney film I saw in theaters on my own accord and I thought it was tepid and stupid even as a child (with admittedly catchy songs). I have, however, enjoyed the now typical dance this film has gone through: ESG casting (yet another redhead replaced by a black actor with no respect for the indigenous Danish people whose story this is) mixed with terrible decisions (special effects/writing) gets confronted by people wanting a good adaptation which is responded to with fan-baiting (if you don't like it, you're an -ist!).

That aside, live action remakes of animated Disney films seems like a bad idea--a very expensive way for Disney to try and double dip on a successful IP (unlike their old process of making direct-to-video sequels). These films cost a ton of money and since the only added content is BlackRock social engineering, the result irritates a portion of the audience which then aggravates the social divide. If you took the title away and simply described the events around this film, no one would have any idea which film was being discussed. The fact that none of these adaptations succeed (except Beauty and the Beast) is finally starting to harm the company, but they are so desperate for the ESG cash injection they can't stop themselves from doing it (that's worth emphasizing--the corporation doesn't care about these issues, they just want the money). Disney is suffering so much from doing this they are currently engaged in massive cost-saving measures (layoffs among them), but there's no sign they are making any effort to improve their products. None of this will change until the cost of receiving BlackRock money is less than the damage done to the brand (you'd think we'd have reached that point, but clearly not). As for the film itself, its opening underperformed (slightly lower than Ant-Man 3 when you cut out holiday Monday, while bombing overseas) and no one is expecting Guardians 3-like audience retention.

Charlie Cox, who was briefly in the disaster that was She-Hulk, has said a lot about the show before and after and it's worth looking at:

There are things that you do when you’re playing a superhero. There are scenes that you read, and you go, ‘The fans are going to love this. This is knock-out.’ And then there’s stuff like the walk of shame, where you’re like, ‘I don’t know. This could go two ways. This could be something that the fans really enjoy, and it could be something that feels like it goes against the nature of what they love about the character and the tone of the piece.' The good thing about doing it on something like She-Hulk is, it’s not Daredevil’s show. It was my job as the actor to come onto another person’s show and embrace the tone, whilst staying as true to the character as I possibly could. In this world, Matt’s in LA, and he lets his hair down a little bit. He’s just having fun. He’s killing it in the courtroom. You know, he has a fling with a really beautiful and charismatic lawyer. And then they get to do some superhero stuff. It tonally felt very different from everything I’ve done as that character, but that was also really exciting and new and different and in keeping with the character. If you read the comics, there are a series of Daredevil comics where the tone is much lighter, and he is much more kind of silly and goofy than perhaps we’ve done much of previously with this character. You can’t please all the people all the time. If She-Hulk’s not your thing, then don’t watch it. Watch something else.

And so when She-Hulk came along and I read those scripts, I felt like this is a really good opportunity to try my hand at that tone with this character and see if I can remain true to the character but also find a side of him that is represented in the comics that would be appropriate for that show. Because the problem is if you take the Daredevil that we know from the other series and you put him in She-Hulk, I think he becomes the butt of the joke. He’s the serious one and everyone – so, I didn’t want that. I don’t think he’s that. So I wanted him to match Jennifer Waters a little bit and that experiment for me was really fun. And I think people responded to that. I actually also haven’t seen that episode. I’ve seen the bits from when we do the ADR, which is the voiceover stuff and it seems fun, you know what I mean? But it was a really cool experiment to see if you could take that character and without losing anything – losing what people love about that character, what I love about that character – and still see him in different places. It’s also true to life. There are times in your life when you find it very difficult to find a sense of humor because you’re struggling or because life is hard, and there’s times when life’s running smoothly and it’s sunglasses and roses.

Apparently Cox took his own advice: if She-Hulk is not your thing, don't watch it. I feel for Cox, as he can't overtly say anything negative about the show, but there are plenty of clues that he's well aware of how bad it was (Simon Pegg's video praising it remains a highlight of hilarity). It's telling that Cox compared his character in the show to the forgotten era of Daredevil when he was 'silly' (his unpopular in the 60s and 70s run, prior to the grounded breakthrough that Cox portrayed in the Netflix show). What I think he's saying in a coded way is that he read the horrendous scripts from Jessica Gao and wanted this iteration to be as far removed from his excellent prior work as possible--if you're looking for the Daredevil you loved, don't watch this show, wink-wink. We've had similar comments from Vincent D'Onfrio about Kingpin in Hawkeye--this isn't the Netflix version--no shit.

Writer's Strike

I haven't been commenting on the writer's strike because it's not holding up anything I want to see. One positive that may come from it is various projects no one wants could get cancelled (fingers crossed), with the strike serving as an easy 'out' for the executives who initially approved them. I'm curious to see what sort of meltdown is happening among corporate execs who are watching Bud Light burn up like the Hindenburg. My guess is they'll see it as an isolated example unless Target, Miller, and others suffer a similar fate.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Conan Update: From Show to Film, the State of the IP

With the attempted rekindling of the Conan IP (see below), I wanted to take a look at both the background and its current status. We're at an odd phase culturally, with the ever increasing popularity of fantasy slamming into 'progressive' Orwellian restrictions (a bit like McCarthyism flipped on its head), making Conan front and center in the battle to escape the top-down narrowing of the field into a weird merger of teen novels with banal postmodern subversion.

To start with, I'll point out that much of Conan's popularity is based not just on the original stories by Robert E. Howard (1906-36), but on pastiche novels from various hands afterwards (including Robert Jordan and Karl Edward Wagner), comic adaptations, and the 1982 film with Arnold Schwarzenegger. With the exception of the film, these iterations were initially inspired by the edited iterations from L. Sprague de Camp (beginning in the 1960s and carrying on into the 70s). That aside, the bedrock remains the originals, such that anyone who wants to tackle the IP has to be firmly entrenched in it (we can see the negative results of ignoring source material in things like Rings of Power, The Wheel of Time, etc). In order to make a successful adaptation there needs to be a firm grounding in the chronology of events, something rather tricky with the Howard canon.

Timeline

Howard never formally organized or completed a chronology for the character (it's doubtful he ever intended something that well defined). While Conan's original stories are episodic, they do have throughlines that can be followed. Up through the 1980s the usual timeline used by imitators/adaptors was the Miller/Clark timeline (I won't get into the weeds of that), but this pseudo-canonical version was challenged by Conan scholars in the 1980s and by the early 2000s had transformed into the largely accepted Rippke chronology (which was used for the Dark Horse comic run at the time). Why does this matter? Because it's important to know when and where pivotal events occur to inform the Conan arc. The character has three main epochs: his early days establishing himself as mercenary and experiencing civilization for the first time; his time when he's established as a respected outsider; his rule as king (the latter is loosely the inspiration for George R. R. Martin's character Robert Baratheon, whose first name is a nod to REH himself). These eras impact how he behaves and how people react to him.

What we've been told about the upcoming comic series from Titan is that they are using their own timeline, but it's not vastly different from what's already out there (presumably a slightly adjusted Rippke); there may be legal reasons to change it, or it may simply be to allow more creative freedom in when and how Conan is represented. This new timeline will almost certainly be used for the upcoming film (should it appear, see below), since the rights holder is responsible for both. Below I've listed the Rippke chronology as a rough guideline, highlighting particularly popular stories in green and those published posthumously or turned into pastiches in italics.

Rippke Chronology*

"The Frost-Giant's Daughter" (unpublished in REH's lifetime)

"The God in the Bowl" (unpublished)

"The Tower of the Elephant"

"The Hall of the Dead" (unfinished; De Camp novelette based on it in 1967)
"Rogues in the House"

"The Hand of Nergal"

"Shadows in the Moonlight"

"Black Colossus"

"Queen of the Black Coast"

"The Snout in the Dark" (unfinished; De Camp/Lin Carter story based on it in 1969)

"The Slithering Shadow"/"Xuthal of the Dusk"

"A Witch Shall Be Born"

"The Devil in Iron"

"The People of the Black Circle"

"Shadows in Zamboula"/"The Man-Eaters of Zamboula"

"Drums of Tombalku" (unfinished; De Camp story based on it in 1966)

"The Vale of Lost Women" (unpublished)

"The Pool of the Black One"

"Beyond the Black River"

"The Black Stranger" (unpublished)

"Red Nails"

"Jewels of Gwahlur"/"Servants of Bit-Yakin"

"Wolves Beyond the Border" (unpublished and re-written by REH as a Western that was also not published; Del Rey version in 1953, De Camp version in 1967)

"The Phoenix on the Sword" (originally the King Kull story 'By This Axe I Rule', but re-written by REH for Conan when it didn't sell)

"The Scarlet Citadel"

The Hour of the Dragon**

*There are errors in the Conan Wiki suggesting a slightly different order listed for Rippke than Rippke himself (or the Wiki's own list), transitioning from "Shadows" to "Witch" etc within the specific articles themselves rather than the list page
**For a number of reasons the novel's plot borrows heavily from "Black Colossus", "The Phoenix on the Sword", and especially "The Scarlet Citadel"

In a comic book series you can jump around in the timeline (just as the original stories did in the pulps), but in a film (or TV-series) the onus is to start early and progress forward. What I'd like to see in a show or film is someone adapt "The Tower of the Elephant" as the character's introduction, particularly as its one of the few stories in the source material to feature genuine pathos and the otherworldly elements Howard borrowed from his friend H. P. Lovecraft. According to writer Jim Zub, besides the OG stories, his primary inspiration for the new comic book series are the Savage Sword of Conan by Roy Thomas in the 70s and the Kurt Busiek run at Dark Horse in the early 2000s (both representing the beginning of the IP at each company). The 12-page free teaser for the series is already out and while there's nothing new for someone familiar with the IP, it's a good introduction to the art style and what the character is all about.

Adaptation Issues

One of the problems for Conan is that very few supporting characters survive after their introductory story (most die). While this is a positive in pulp fiction, it doesn't mesh well with modern storytelling. The most formulaic Conan stories devolve into monster/lady-of-the-week (not problematic in pulp or comics, but it is in a TV show or series of films). It's notable that the best of the original stories have more going on in them, so what can you do?

One option is expanding an existing story with surviving characters and carry them forward (like Valeria in "Red Nails"). Newly created characters can be inserted, although it becomes more difficult to make them work when you are sticking to the existing canon (since they will be forced to vanish repeatedly). There's also the option to merge several characters, as Roy Thomas did in creating Red Sonja (cf), but I think that's much less likely given how the current rights operator sees the IP.

What about our modern audience? One of the supposed concerns over the last 6-7 years is the fragile, progressive younger audiences--how can we appeal to them? We know this concern is fake and simply a byproduct of the strings attached to BlackRock investment (who are quite open in pushing social engineering), but since most people are unaware of that, let's take the rhetoric seriously. As we've seen from the numbers, pandering does not work (Gen Z doesn't care and are happily reading manga and watching anime en masse which, if anything, echoes comics of the 1970s). So the answer is, artistically, almost nothing. There are a few things within Howard's work that would need adjusting (these stories were written in the 1930s and designed to appeal to that audience), but those changes are minimal. One element that's not at issue with the IP is diversity, as Conan's stories are stuffed with diverse people (Conan cares about your behaviour, not your ethnicity).

The Future

The Conan IP has been on a long journey ever since Millenium's failed Jason Momoa vehicle in 2011. The faults of that film were not its star, but the terrible writing. Years afterwards, Amazon acquired the rights and approved two seasons under future House of the Dragon team Ryan Condal and Miguel Sapochnik, but this was axed when Jennifer Salke took over, seeing the IP as 'too problematic'. Netflix acquired the series and put it under original Daredevil team Steven S. DeKnight and Kris Henigman. After three years what's rumoured is the duo had a falling out with Netflix (unrelated to Conan) and Rob David, the man responsible for Netflix's disastrous He-Man cartoon, was brought onboard. This made it impossible to make a proper Conan adaptation since David wanted the IP to be made for 'a modern audience' while the rights holder wanted an actual adaptation. The show was thus taken away from Netflix, so what now?

The new plan is for a film. While I think a show is a better fit (as it matches both the original pulp format as well as the successful comic adaptations), this is the next best thing. Despite the problems on screen, Conan properties is not floundering, as it's 2018 MMO (Conan Exiles) is doing well; we've had a new Conan book from S. M. Stirling (Conan: Blood of the Serpent) which hit shelves in December (the first Conan novel since the movie adaptation in 2011 and the first pastiche since Harry Turtledove's Conan of Venarium from 2003); the original stories by REH remain constantly in print; and a new comic series at Titan via Jim Zub is launching this summer (away from the withered and dying Marvel). I'm not a fan of MMO's and would rather see a proper video game RPG, but personal preferences aside, these are all good signs (unlike some other abused and dying IPs). This doesn't guarantee we'll get a good or successful film (Courtney Soloman had the best of intentions with his Dungeons & Dragons film, after all), but what it does mean is the IP still resonates and there's an audience for it. I do wonder about distribution for such a film, as that's currently holding up Millenium's Red Sonja, but given that interest in Conan has never gone away, time is on his side.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Guardians 3, Indiana Jones 5, Blade, Cleopatra, and Conan

I have no idea who was eager for Guardians 3 (the Christmas Special barely made a blip and no one I know has seen it). We had indications of diminished interest when the second film failed to outperform the first (an anomaly in that era of the MCU). The Infinity Saga films helped, but they also created a problem for the finale: there were almost no character arcs left to finish--the second film completed Quill's personal arc; the Infinity films completed the romance along with Gamora and Nebula's arcs; Groot isn't a character, so all that's left is Rocket. I like the racoon, but never felt drawn to his backstory (something that seemed purely functional). I've said before that James Gunn's 'magic' from the first film was a fluke because he's never repeated it (The Suicide Squad was horrendous). In addition, the MCU brand has turned into a broken sewer pipe, dragging down each new product. All of this meant that Guardians 3 was going to have to be a great movie to reach box office expectations. Clearly, it isn't (as we can see above).

Prior to release projections for it were falling, but it managed to open better than Ant-Man 3. Despite the weak opening, it had a strong second weekend, so it won't bomb. That said, it's still on track to be limp, final gasp of the nostalgic holdovers from the first three Phases (it will fall short of Thor 3 numbers, which is a disappointment, but it will at least break even).

This film was the last nostalgia bullet left in the MCU gun (even most of the Netflix nostalgia is exhausted, with only an aged Jessica Jones left to debut). The big names won't come back (although money could change that), and there's nothing in the pipeline for anyone to get excited about (the hilarity continues as the MCU-run Marvel comics has killed Ms. Marvel, which must say something about how that IP has been received). Marvel has admitted internally that their writing is terrible and hurting the product, but the people responsible for that are still in charge and I can't imagine anything can change so long as they continue to aim for ESG/BlackRock funding (which, besides the money itself, is required to win awards, and winning awards often has cash incentives attached to it for creators).

More often than not, critics give expensive films a free pass when they put out their reviews, but the gloves are off for Indian Jones 5 and it's amusing to see (similar to Witcher: Blood Origin, where Netflix allowed critics to dogpile it, cf, unlike the equally awful Willow). This latitude can only come with the tacit permission of the studio, so clearly Bob Iger is aware there's no saving the Kathleen Kennedy spearheaded sequel. Personally, given how awful Indiana Jones 4 is (and how comparatively weak the third film is), this isn't a surprise. Only the short-lived TV adaptation (1992-93) of the IP properly navigated what you could do with it (that show made me aware of Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, among other things). This is also the wrong era for pulp adaptations (see Conan below), as that's considered too toxic for the sensibilities of the sensitive public (apparently no one in the 1% has read or viewed manga/anime). In this case, I'm perfectly content putting the IP to bed and it's another welcome embarrassment for Disney (not that I think this will meaningfully improve their future products).

The Blade odyssey continues, as production was halted due to the writer's strike. You have to wonder just what they'll do given that Mahershala Ali was not young when signed and, now at 49, how far you can go with the character whenever it appears? Marvel's initial pan was for Blade to immediately pass the torch to a female successor (ala Kate Bishop/Hawkeye), so his age wasn't an issue when hired, but as Ali has almost certainly demanded having the focus on him, the problem re-emerges. I also wonder what sort of MCU environment Blade could fit into--the brand is in freefall, so will anyone care in 2-3 years when (if) the film comes out?

The Jada Smith Cleopatra controversy has been hilarious to watch. It's one of the few occasions where people on the right and left came together to reject nonsense (The Mary Sue condemned it, when you'd assume they would fully support ESG initiatives irrespective of quality). On the surface the documentary is no different than the broader trend we've seen in entertainment (be it a black Anne Boleyn or Queen Charlotte), but Smith irrationally made the decision to call her historical invention a 'documentary' and this put Netflix in a bind (despite their reputation for being 'creative' with facts). While the usual response of calling any criticism racist was used, it didn't cause the usual reflection in the media since Egyptians were protesting the lunacy on display. The show bombed immediately and if there's a positive beyond that, it's that a few Americans have become educated on the issue (it's amazing how many, including Smith herself, believe Africa is racially homogenized--the star was also unaware, saying "I find it sad that people are either so self-loathing or so threatened by the Blackness that they feel the need to do that, to separate Egypt from the rest of the continent"). For decades I've watched Americans try to claim Egypt as a cultural touchstone for African-Americans and it's a bizarre approach given that there are plenty of genuine options to use. I suspect the appeal is a mix of Egypt's importance in the bible (Christianity remains an important element within the African-American community) and as the most well-known/popular culture in Africa.

We finally got an update on Conan at Netflix, which is to say Conan is no longer at Netflix and is now being pursued as a future film. The IP sat at the streaming service for three years after being given a pass at Amazon (spending two years there). The problem was the same in both places, as neither was willing to make an authentic adaptation. Fortunately for Conan, his rights holder won't cave ala Sapkowski or the Tolkien Estate, so whenever we do see him on-screen, it will be in the proper spirit. Just like with Indiana Jones above, this is a bad era for pulp heroes, since there's no interest in white male leads and the usual story arcs that go with them. That's not to say the public doesn't want them, but rather that executives making creative decisions do not. Culturally we are starting to see this be slightly rolled back and that change could accelerate depending on a number of factors, but at least for Conan none of this is an issue as long as there's a distributor found (a problem the sister IP, Red Sonja, has yet to conquer, cf).

This article was written by Peter Levi

Honor Among Thieves Bombs, More Jonathan Majors Fallout, and Conan Update

As I mentioned last time, the Dungeons & Dragons film has flopped despite positive reviews and the support of D&D personalities. It's only made 180 million worldwide, meaning it will lose money. As disastrous as this is, I don't think it will impact Joe Manganiello's efforts to get a Dragonlance TV-show picked-up (which is not the same show that Paramount+ announced three months ago and whose continued existence we'll keep an eye on), although he'll now have to pitch how this will be different given that it's coming from a similar creative team (which means it will likely share the generic aesthetic of all modern fantasy adaptations).

The difficult question to answer is: why did the film fail? I've seen it twice now and it remains entertaining, so that's not the issue (my review is here). My theory is that it's not distinctive enough--the story lacks depth/weight and it looks like every other recent fantasy adaptation. It's ironic that in an effort to target the general audience it failed to attract it entirely (in fact, economically, it's going to mirror the legendary 2000 bomb from Courtney Soloman). I'll be interested to see how the community reflects on this failure (my guess is they won't; the reasoning from shills is nonsensical, 'it was never going to succeed because of the brand' (!)). Honor's failure is, in the grand scheme of things, less impactful than Shazam 2 or Ant-Man 3, as those films not were meant to promote future franchises. One of the main takeaways we have from genre films and shows of the last 6-7 years is that audiences are not attracted to their generic approach--they want something distinctive (Avatar 2) or nostalgic (Top Gun 2/Mario Brothers).

Speaking of Ant-Man 3, Jonathan Majors has been dropped by his talent manager three weeks after domestic assault charges were laid. When the incident happened, Majors' reps said there was video and text messages that would exonerate him. The former hasn't been released, but texts were and did not help the perception of Majors at all. The signal here is obvious: his management either believes he's guilty or that the public damage can't be assuaged despite his innocence. We still have no idea what really happened--this isn't an Ezra Miller situation where the evidence is out there for the public to judge. Regardless, this makes it an almost certainty that the MCU will have to re-cast Kang. I wouldn't expect any radical departure if they do and losing Majors means nothing (I've seen it jokingly suggested he'll be replaced by a POC woman, which I think is actually plausible)--while the industry has hyped the actor for some time, he has made no impact on box office or TV viewership (the Taylor Kitsch of this generation), and since Ant-Man 3 bombed there's no audience appetite that will be disappointed by his absence.

It has been awhile since we had a Conan update (July), and while news on the Netflix show remains static, the IP has moved forward on the comic side of things. Marvel let the license lapse (presumably because Kevin Feige has the same issues with the IP as Amazon's Jennifer Salke), so it's now self-publishing at Titan comics, which means all the usual censorship from Marvel or Dark House has been removed (essentially: graphic violence and boobs). Jim Zub (who is one of the writers who wrote the character at Marvel and is the only person to write a half-decent Alpha Flight comic in the last ten years) is writing it. How successful it will be among the shrinking market place of comic book buyers I don't know, but for the sake of the IP I hope it does well. If nothing else it will be distinctive from prior iterations while being firmly entrenched in the lore, which bodes well.

This article was written by Peter Levi