Studio:
New Line Cinema.
Production Company:
New Line Cinema.
Project Phase: Movies Rumored.
Who's In It:
No one confirmed as yet.
Who's Making It:
Clint Goldman (Producer); Todd McFarlane
(Creator, Executive Producer); Industrial Light and Magic (Special
Visual Effects); based upon Todd McFarlane's Image comic book series Spawn.
Premise: Unknown.
Release Date: Unknown.
Comments: Because computer-generated creatures from hell are hard to keep down, especially when their flick does well at the box office, the makers of Spawn are planning for a second outing. Known affectionately as the 1997 summer movie that was "much much cooler than that Batman piece of #*&^", if the same group of people come back to work on a second one, then we might be in for a show. The set-up was already made in the first movie: if you blinked during the scene where Spawn confronts Jason Wynn for the first time you probably missed the Angela cameo. And besides, who doesn't want to see that cape one more time, eh?
But, um, guys? FIX the Hell sequences, would you? Please??
Rumors: Unknown.
Scoop Feedback:
[Necroplasmodic page draft submitted by 'Widgett'. We cleaned it up.]
September 7, 1997... Clint Goldman, producer of the first film, has stated in the recent issue of Wizard that a sequel is inevitable. They haven't had a chance to honestly sit down and talk about it, but he's fairly certain it's coming down the pike. Leguizamo and White have both expressed interest in returning for a reprise of their roles, and McFarlane has said that if the two return and provide consistency in the franchise, then onward Christian...er, Hellspawn soldiers!
But one factor remains unknown: the final grosses. In the Wizard article, Goldman felt that based upon the audience reactions he encountered before the film's release, he believed it was possible the film could pass the golden $100 million dollar mark at the box office; however Goldman felt that a final take of close to $70 mil was the watermark New Line was hoping for. At the present time the movie is just under that. [Scoop transmitted via ouija board by 'Widgett.']
September 17, 1997... "Just wanted to correct the scoop about how much money the first Spawn is making. It only has made 53 million dollars domestically, has slowed to only a million a week as of last week, and is barely in the top 20 movies now. With the rush of fall movies on the way, it will be lucky to take in 55 million. Thats a far cry from 70 million dollars." [Transmitted by 'Charles CGarna1'.]
Remember Widgett's comments about the Hell FX from the first Spawn up above? Well someone from ILM was reading the page and had this to say about the whole matter:
"I have just a quick response to your line on the Spawn 2 page: 'But, um, guys? FIX the Hell sequences, would you? Please??'
"ILM did *not* do those sequences. I think there were over 26 FX companies involved in some way or another. We handled most of the prominent shots: Spawn's cape, CG Violator, CG Spawn including transformations.
"I just wanted this to be clear because our name is the most prominent and we have a reputation to uphold...
"As far as a Spawn 2 is concerned, I haven't heard anything. I think they'll wait till it comes out on video and see how well it does in that format as well." [Signed 'ILMing'.]
We know C.O.R.E. did contribute to some FX work in Spawn but as with most of the rest of the audience that went to see the film, we couldn't tell you what other companies worked on the show. These days it's considered pretty standard that many effects companies work on one picture but that the credit (or shame) gets lumped on the primary contributor.
So we did a quick informal poll of the Corona employees and asked those who had seen Spawn what they thought of the FX. Of the four people, all agreed that the Violator was the best piece of realistic beastie CGI since Jurassic Park days. However, three of the four found that the Hell sequences were their least favorite FX. (It should be noted that, for the record, the one guy who thought "It looked pretty neat," was CA Director Patrick Sauriol...and he swears he's not sucking up to the ILM scooper.)
One animator thought that Malbolgia looked "nothing like he was supposed to look like," and also felt that the images of the Spawn Army were looped (meaning the same movements of the background characters were played back in a 'loop' ever few seconds.) Two felt that the scenes looked "surrealistic" and that they didn't notice anything out-of-place.
(It also should be said that this is just our personal take on the film, and to show readers out there we're as picky and irritating as the next bunch of guys. We really don't want to start up a 'What Did You Think of Spawn's FX Sequences?' page...)
Another scoop came in that puzzled us. Hoping that someone out there connected with McFarlane or the film's production could help us sort this matter out, we're going to post the email:
" Interesting that there is an Angela 'teaser' in the film to set up the sequel.
"As you probably know, the character of Angela was created by Neil Gaiman when he guest-wrote one of the early Spawn issues. She has proven to be probably the most successful secondary character, but get this: Gaiman apparently hasn't received a penny of compensation for subsequent appearances in Spawn, action figures etc. If she were to appear in the movie, we would be talking big bucks.
"As you state in your story on the AvP controversy, comic creators' rights are usually not the most honored, but Image comics was allegedly founded by MacFarlane _specically_ to create an environment in which comic creators are respected and retain _control_ over their own creations. Further, Gaiman is said to be fairly obsessive about retaining control of the characters he creates. For example, no one at DC is allowed to use any of the Sandman characters (even minor ones) without his say-so.
"I read an interview with Gaiman (sorry, can't remember the source) in which he said he was very unhappy with MacFarlane's complete appropriation of the Angela character and that he would be doubly unhappy were she to appear in the movie. If you have any more information about this, I'd love to hear it."
We haven't heard anything about this matter and assumed that the rights and assets were worked out during Gaiman's tenure writing issue #9 of Spawn; if that isn't the case, then there must be something more to the matter. Is what the scooper reports actually true and Gaiman (and any of the other writers/contributors to McFarlane's Spawn comic) does not own copyrights to the characters they created? We'd love to find out more about this. [Thanks to Richard Leung for the scoop.]
October 7, 1997... Well, not one word has been announced about a sequel to Spawn but the feedback for this page is hoppin'. Looks like the McFarlane/Gaiman and Fx controversy for the first film have caused a number of readers to write up their thoughts in an email.
First, about the film's effects: here is the feedback we received. We think in regards to any possible misinterpretation taken from the scoops above about which firms did FX work for Spawn, only one is credited with the FX for the Hell sequences: Santa Barbara Studios. (Ed. note - and y'know, I still gotta say it even though everyone is entitled to their own opinions: I *liked* the Hell sequences!) Of course, this stuff really should go into the Spawn page - and it will, once the matter dies down. For now, read on:
"If anyone wants to get the full, official story behind the effects work on the first Spawn pick up the September 1997 issue of CINEFEX magazine, the absolute best publication in existence for visual effects buffs like myself. The article talks about which comapanies did which effects and why. The Hell F/X were done by Santa Barbara Studios, and had to be done cheaply (for about a million dollars) because of the budget. To avoid having to resort to cheaper matte painting and bluescreen techniques, the production team cut SEVEN whole days from the 70-day production schedule and gave the money to Santa Barbara Studios to do a completely digital Hell. Originally, Malebogia was planned as a puppet effect, but it looked too much like a bluescreened puppet in front of a digital Hell, so with very little time before the movie's release date, SBS had to design a digital Malebogia. They were forced to modify their existing CG werewolf from An American Werewolf In Paris in order to make Malebogia, which explains why they didn't have time to lip-synch dialogue on the digital Malebogia. Almost half of the effects shots you see in the movie were added only after the successful test screening on May 28th. After that, New Line approved more money for more effects, but with less than two months before a finish print was to be delivered. That is why most of the new effects were portioned out to so many other companies. Overall, the movie is a pretty amazing feat when you consider how pressed for time the filmmakers were. [Sent in by 'FexLover'.]
"Take a look at the Devil in Spawn and the werewolf on the poster for American Werewolf in Paris. If you look closely, you'll notice they are quite similar. Turns out Santa Barbara Studios had to use the same CG model for Spawn that they had already created for AWP. They just stretched it and colored it a little bit differently." Still, it don't look a bit like Julie Delpy. [Sent in by 'Zodiac'.]
Ooo! Even a scoop about a possible sequel plot point in this scoop - and in the Spawn 2 page! Whadda know about that??
"Santa Barbara Studios was responsible for the Malebogia creature in the first film. A puppet was created by KNB studios (the makers of the Violator 'live' puppet), but a large amount of money flowed into the production near the end, management thought that a CG creature was in order. Santa Barbara hastily put together a Malebogia, using a pre-created monster (from the upcoming American Werewolf in Paris movie). This was all done a month before the release of the movie. Also, at the Spawn wrap party, several of the 'biggies', with beer in hand, hinted Candy (Priest) Clark's return as the female spawn (notice in the movie, Priest's dead body is focused on a little bit too long). As for the Pull Down Your Pants team (Dippe, Goldman, Williams), they have their hands full on other projects, so don't expect a quick sequel. Do expect a nastier Spawn Director's Cut (rated R) with more crude and rude from Clown. [Sent to us by our buddy, 'Shmeckie'.]
"Re: the FX for Spawn (as noted on your Spawn 2 page) - yes, C.O.R.E. did some FX for Spawn - but NOT the Hell stuff (read the current issue of Cinefex to get that info). I felt it necessary to clarify this in case your readers assumed that, since we are the only other FX company mentioned in your article other than ILM, we went to Hell." [Sent in anonymously...but we get the picture. So do you as well.]
"...in regards to the infamous 'hell sequences', they were done by Santa Barbera Studios. The animator on those shots was James Strauss, of Dragonheart fame. (source: Cinefex magazine)" [Sent anonymously.]
Now, about the Angela character and whether or not McFarlane has paid royalties to its creator, Neil Gaiman:
"Gaiman was indeed stiffed by Todd and was upset, so much so that he ripped him in an interview found at the Mania website. Neil said that he was the one that came up with the entire angel concept and that Todd had nothing to do with it. And, as reported earlier, McFarlane has not paid Gaiman for all the Angela use and the ideas that Neil helped to develop for the Spawn universe. (Frankly, it seems to me that all the good Spawn ideas came from the guest writers that worked on Spawn way back.) At any rate, at the end of the article, something was said about Todd and Neil possibly working out an agreement in the very near future. And to add more fuel to the fire, it has also been printed that McFarlane may give the rights of Miracleman to Gaiman in exchange for Angela and all the other related stuff. If this has happened, maybe Neil doens't care anymore. But since nothing concrete has been said, who knows!" [Contributed by Shane.]
"In response to the Neil Gaiman controversy, I, too, read the article in which Gaiman mentioned what could be perceived as a big screw-over by McFarlane. I believe it was an interview in Wizard Magazine. With his typical dry understatement, Gaiman said he thought it was '..interesting' that he hadn't received a penny from any of the Angela merchandising, or subsequent use in the comics. I also later read that Gaiman and McFarlane had quietly sorted out the issue, but I don't know any of the details. Perhaps one or the others will reveal it in a later interview." [Contributed by 'dmccaw']
September 22, 1998... This scooper writes in to tell us that Todd McFarlane has confirmed a darker film for the sequel--and he's going for the R rating. Awww, yeah. He's looking to the summer of 2000 for it to hit theaters. [Originally appeared in Wizard; reported by 'HKhaleghi']
October 19, 1998...Who will be returning characterwise? We know from McFarlane and Simmons that the next film will be darker and set in a urban setting. According to this fellow, they've heard that Tony Twist will be the villain for the sequel. Also, the characters from the comic, Sam and Twitch, will be featured. Truth? Eh, who knows -- we'll see in a year or two. [Scoop submitted anonymously.]
October 20, 1998... In the latest issue of Fangoria Todd McFarlane talks briefly about what you'll see in the next Spawn film. McFarlane is quoted as saying "The only thing the next movie will have in common with the first one is the logo. If you put the two films next to each other, they're not going to be the same. One is a special-effects PG-13 movie and the next one will be a staight R-Rated suspense drama. We're going to make Spawn the boogeyman in the next one." [Passed on by Larry Jordi; originally appeared in Fangoria (everyone's favorite splatter magazine).]
November 1, 1998... Although we can't confirm a word of it we may have landed an inside picture on what important characters will be in Spawn 2. This scooper claimed his father knows Todd McFarlane by way of a comic book store McFarlane owns in Washington state; we'd imagine that's 'The Spawning Lair'. According to our scooper, their Dad heard the latest from the Toddmeister. McFarlane confirmed that the second film be definitely be darker and probably rated 'R' -- no surprise there, as he's told as much to the press before. However, the scooper revealed that the character of Angela will also be in this film, and that's news to us. Angela was said to be "helping" Spawn. Also, the five Philbelic brothers of the Violator will also be shown. All five of his siblings will be created by CGI. [Anonymous.]
|
Copyrights and trademarks for the film and related entertainment properties mentioned
herein are held by their respective owners and are used with
permission or solely for the promotional purposes of said properties.
All other text and images copyright © 1995-98 Corona Productions. Last updated: Sunday, 01-Nov-1998 19:02:59 PST. webmaster@corona.bc.ca |