Sgt Rock and the Easy Company were one of the few true World War 2 based comic books published by DC. He was the first to be called The Rock, and he embodied the true American military hero leading his men of Easy Company. At a time when GI Joe dolls er.. action figures even paid tribute to the character.
So for a while now there has been talk that a Sgt Rock feature film is in development and now Joel Silver will be producing this with Francis Lawrence directing the Chad St John script.
The only difference is that the classic World War 2 military hero won’t be in World War 2.
Silver originally wanted the film to take place in WWII, so what changed? “A big budget always was an obstacle and, ‘Inglourious Basterds’ notwithstanding, period war movies have not been in vogue in Hollywood for years, unless it was a more serious contemplation of the subject like ‘Saving Private Ryan,'” says THR, “The studio hopes moving the time period to the future solves the dilemma.” I have no idea if by “future” they mean now, or 2139.
I don’t understand the need to change the time frame of the character. Clearly the appeal of Sgt Rock wasn’t purely the character. It was the setting as well.
So vampire movies are very much “in vogue” right now, so does that mean they should make Sgt Rock a vamp?
I would sooner have them sit on this until the time is right. They have plenty of other properties to play with that fit the current market, and rather than force the issue and update Sgt Rock. The book was about a man in THAT war, not just a man in a war.
I think it’s more likely that Sgt Rock would fail if it WASN’T set in the early 1940s.
