LogFAQs > #960521782

I kind of am. Mostly because I'm just curious to see what they do with it.

I can see a scenario where the movie is really good. I can also see scenarios where it's absolutely terrible.

I don't think the character is inherently terrible if it's done right. The question is whether or not it's done right.



MeadCore posted...

hes like a vampire but a vampire with a new kind of supernatural AIDS

It's because in the 70s, the Comics Code was kind of draconian about what you could show in a comic book. Anything "supernatural" was generally banned because it was considered to be too much like "horror" (and killing horror comics was a large part of the goal of the Comics Code in the first place).

Vampires and "wolfmen" weren't allowed. So they made Morbius a vampire who wasn't a "real" vampire, who got his powers via science rather than magic or a curse, and they called him the "living vampire" (which doesn't really make much sense when you think about it). His origin is more or less similar to Spider-Man's, just with a bat instead of a spider (it's also sort of similar to the Lizard's, where deliberately taking a serum based on animal blood partly turns someone into that animal).

And the Comics Code Authority was basically like, "Ehh, okay, cool", because the Comics Code was always something of a joke anyway.



MeadCore posted...

from the trailer it looks like a movie that should have been released in like 2006

Well, Sony's been wanting to do a Spider-Man Extended Universe for almost 10 years now, so it might feel a little dated if they came up with the idea a long time ago.
---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family