I’ve recently had a chance to re-watch 1975’s Doc Savage: The Man of Bronze and 1994’s The Shadow. Overall, both are disappointing for a fan of the pulps.
Among the problems:
• Characterizations: Neither film captured the pulp characters of Doc’s aides or The Shadow and his agents.
• Taking liberties: Okay, maybe I’m a pulp purist here, but, hey, Lamont Cranston and Marot Lane weren’t telepathically linked. And, for that matter, neither was Doc Savage with his aides.
• Storyline: Let’s get serious. A little humor along the way (i.e. Monk vs. Ham) is okay, but let’s keep plot serious.
Last Christmas brought new rumors of a Shadow movie being produced by Michael Uslan for Sony Pictures.
If the movie is still in the works, having Uslan involved would an intriguing thought. Uslan, who was executive producer for 2005’s popular Batman Begins, brings along better pulp-related credentials than either George Pal or those involved with 1994’s The Shadow.
When he gave the commencement address at the Indiana University (Bloomington) in May 2006, Uslan recalled:
I’m now at DC in New York and they offer me a summer job. So, one July day as I’m walking by the office of the editor of a comic book character called The Shadow, I hear him complaining loudly that he has no idea for a Shadow script due the very next day. Quickly, I poked my head into his office and blurted out, “I have an idea for a story.” I didn’t. But I did realize here was a “moment” …a chance to get my foot in the door. Carpe Diem. I hemmed and hawed and created a story on the spot. The editor told me to have the script on his desk in 24 hours. Suddenly, I’m a comic book writer for DC Comics.
Uslan ended up writing two issues of the ’70s DC version of The Shadow, thought by many to be the best Shadow comic adaptation. No, the two stories weren’t classics, nor did they necessarily follow “pulp canon.” But they did seem to capture the nature of The Shadow and his agents better than the 1994 movie.
Maybe he will instill a respect of The Shadow in the screenwriters and director, just as he did for Batman. That’s something missing from past efforts.
— William
They did some things right in the ’94 movie. Certainly, the budget for art direction let them create the right settings. And Alec Baldwin looked the part dressed as The Shadow.
But it’s too bad they were too lighthearted, as you say. A darker picture would have been perfect. The pulp Shadow has always been dark. It’s obvious much of the movie character was based on the radio Shadow.
The telepathy and the living Phurba dagger just seemed completely out of place. I’ve always thought Walter Gibson did a great job of anchoring his Shadow stories to reality. All of the “invisibility” and tricks up The Shadow’s sleeve were based on stealthy and sleight-of-hand.
If they’ve gotten far enough along for a director to be involved, that’s great news.
Last I heard (a few weeks back), they had a director attached to the Shadow flick. No one’s saying who just yet, but it’s got me all tingly inside. I hope to God they don’t mess it up.
On the other hand, I happen to like the 1994 movie. I know, I know, it’s kind of all wrong in a canon-related sense, but I thought it was fun. I just read through all of the Shiwan Khan issues of the pulps, and was surprised by how well the four stories were combined to make the movie. (Aside from the bronzium coin angle. Whatever.) The movie was too goofy, too lighthearted, and definitely lacked the “Shadow” feeling of mystery and darkness. It’s still got a small place in my heart just because it’s the Shadow, though.
I’ve been excited by the talk of the new Shadow project and that Uslan is associated through his Batfilm. Did you see his Elseworlds graphic novel, Batman: Detective 23? It had Batman in his original period, and included a suitably shrouded reference to the Shadow as his mentor. Uslan may also be associated with the new greenlighted film of Will Eisner’s Spirit.
I also enjoyed the Alec Baldwin film, which got more right than wrong.