McFarlane Can Set Up New ‘Spawn’ Flick Anywhere He Wants

Posted by Dr. Cole Abaius (cole.abaius@filmschoolrejects.com) on April 30, 2009

spawn_1

Here’s where I defend the idea of a new Spawn film to the masses that are probably 1) still pissed about the first one b) apathetic because it’s been so long since the anti-hero was anywhere near the spotlight or 3) set to distrust any sequel that comes out more than a decade after the first by default. I swear I have a good reason, and you’ll have to wade through a little information before I give it.

First, the news – IESB caught up with Todd McFarlane in Tempe during the premiere of Wolverine: Revenge of the Tracking Shot, and the comic icon claimed that he currently had five full offers to go ahead on Spawn 2 (which will probably be named something far better). According to the report, the scope of the offers is broad, ranging from small to large budgets, but there are offers regardless.

I have no idea how a sequel to Spawn could be done on an small budget – the CGI alone is a serious investment – so it seems obvious that the creator of the series would want to go with as large a budget as possible while still retaining the right amount of creative freedom. I also have no idea if Michael Jai White would still have a chance of being featured as the hell-bound bad ass, and it seems highly unlikely that Mark A.Z. Dippe would be anywhere near the running for the director’s chair again considering he hasn’t directed anything since.

But why would a second Spawn be cool?

Because the first one wasn’t that great. Hear me out on this.

The first one was flawed mostly because it was an average story. It was a gorgeous film with odd characters, but it only really drew from the origin story and told it fairly averagely, never really giving a ton of stuff for Al Simmons to do beyond battling some mini-bosses and then going up against the main boss. Pretty standard. But the comic canon has a decent amount of very cool stuff in it that could be adapted for the screen, and we’re living in a world where audiences and studios are taking comic adaptations more seriously. The worst case scenario is that it turns out to be a fun visual ride again. The best case scenario is that a filmmaker with balls enough to explore the depth of the character will move past the origin story and create a brilliantly dark character study with weight. It has the potential and source material to become a fantastic comic book film. Hopefully all the right pieces will come together.

What do you think?

Related Reading:

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

Chris

I'd rather they finished up the HBO animated series.

LittleMovieMan

Hell yeah i second that

Aleric

I don't think Mc Farland can even do the animated series correctly. He seems to want to make spawn set in a normal world like Batman but you can't do that as he will not have any "Bad Guys" to fight againt that will be believeable to actually defeat him. Adapt the movie DIRECTLY from the comic book with all the topics that were removed to make the movie more kid friendly.

ANGRYBROOMSTICK

Spawn was one of the WORST movies of all time.

Jacob

The comics became boring after issue one and I highly doubt even devoted fans will care that a new film will be made. It was an art book and though McFarlane should be applauded for creating a character and franchise outside the boundaries of modern comics, it still was just that, an art book. There really was no substantial importance of the book and Al Simmons isn't a character most people can connect with. So no, this movie shouldn't be made and McFarlane needs to quit thinking people give a crap about him anymore.

duck

i think if they just touched on the violater, overtkill, and tood's version of NYC, this would be a decent movie. Just go small on the origns, its really easy to follow. Man gets burned, goes to hell and comes back as a superhero. TADA!

tmccar20

I remember him saying and even posting his website of another animated series, with spawn being the only super being, which sounds alot better than when the comic was more about the politics of heaven and hell ( they were treated more like warring countries than like heaven and hell). The idea of describing Heaven and Hell is where, if there a film, makes it stupid the both kind of indescribale. Dealing with sin and the inability effect change while being all powerful, is what spawn did right, the comic that is. I hope that it is not a direct sequel, because no one remembers the first one, and it felt like crow with a more special effects budget. But in the end Spawn has to differs himself from batman and from being campy. However, I think if they wanted to do the film right, look to the narrows in batman begins, all the scenes there could have spawn in them. I am willing to watch another origins story because the first one was that bad.

Big Rob

It's been like 14 years since that last diaster was put to film I was a huge fan of the books and the animated series but the movie blew fart nuggets. and lets face it Todd McFarlane hasn't done anything of interest since a reunion with the Image guys. I needs to pick up a pencil and start drawing again.

McFarlane Can Set Up New ‘Spawn’ Flick Anywhere He Wants

Related Topics:

Related Reading: