Comments on: Do critics hate comic book movies?

By: Crystal

Crystal — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 19:41:37 +0000

Movies based on a TV show…
What’s the point? I mean, it’s already on TV. Movies based on novels I can get, based on comic books…well, maybe…But TV shows?
I mean, c’mon, all you’re gonna do is take it and, for lack of better words, un-cartoon it.
(Yeah, I know that there are better words, but…That pretty much describes how I feel, at least. )

By: Phoenix

Phoenix — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 20:05:24 +0000

More than just the length of a is the detail that can be packed into it. Novels and films and comic books and short stories are different storytelling media. Things look different and stories must be told differently from one to another. There are stories I’ve seen in comics that I thought would be great to see on-screen and there’ve been those that I figured would be difficult to adapt. Not all should be.

I don’t think most critics hate comic movies. I’ve always felt that they have a bias that originates in a lack of respect for comics themselves. What many comic fans don’t realize is that outside the bubble of fandom most people don’t give comic books a thought in their lives. To the average citizen, comics are for children. That citizen might have looked at them as a child or had friends who did, but they are a thing of their distant past. I remember a lot of people taking the news of Superman’s death in battle with Doomsday with great surprise. A lot of those people were also very surprised that comics were still being made.

It’ll probably be a while before they see the comic book (originally collections of Sunday color comic pages stapled together like a cheap book) as the graphic novel it has grown into and respect it as a legitimate storytelling alternative that Hollywood runs to as a credible source of material and not just some lunatic choice brought up at a desperate staff meeting.

By: B. Mac

B. Mac — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 19:22:49 +0000

Oh, I thought of at least one obstacle for comic book movies rather than, say, novel or TV show adaptations. I feel it's substantially harder to adapt a comic book's visuals into live action. In a cartoon or comic book, it's not THAT hard to make an incredibly ugly or freakish character look somewhat appealing (or at least not like a total eyesore) in 2-D form. However, when viewers see the character in a live-action movie, I think it's harder for viewers to keep it out of their mind that the character(s) look REALLY ugly and/or REALLY goofy.
I think this makes it harder for comic book movies to handle deformed villains, nonhuman species and (to some extent) flamboyant costumes. For example, here are some comic book and cartoon versions of Kilowog, the main mentor character in Green Lantern. He's definitely never won any awards for huggability, but I thought he turned out pretty well in some of his comic book and cartoon renderings. He's not so disastrously ugly that he'd distract many readers, I feel.
Comic Book:
Cartoon:
He's definitely not winning any awards for huggability, but I feel like he's not SO ugly in these formats that he'd distract readers.
Live action: I dunno. I haven't seen the new Green Lantern movie yet, but my initial impression from this still is that he's so ugly that he probably would distract me.

By: B. Mac

B. Mac — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 05:08:59 +0000

Oh, whoops. I thought it was the father he called by his name. My mistake.

By: Wings

Wings — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 04:45:02 +0000

I think the story with Russell’s family is that he had a Missing Mom, his dad didn’t interact with him much, and he spent most of his time with his father’s wife/girlfriend (Carl: “Phyllis? You call your own mother by her first name?” Russell:”Phyllis isn’t my mother.”), wasn’t it?

- Wings

By: B. Mac

B. Mac — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:57:50 +0000

“…Wait a moment, I just noticed you said “start”, not “end”. what I said apply or not?” Ack, good eye! I meant to say “end” and have corrected the article.

I think the boy’s family is largely just as screwed up because:
1) A friendly and supportive retiree is not a substitute for a real father. Will he even survive to see Carl through high school?
2) The relationship between Russell and his mom’s boyfriend isn’t improving.
3) By the end of the movie, the mother still hasn’t figured out her problem: she picked a loser and her son’s suffering for it. (Poor judge of character).

However, let me clarify that it’s not a bad thing that Pixar decided not to completely resolve the family problems with a magical Hollywood ending, like Russell’s parents get happily married or, even worse, Russell’s mom getting happily married to Carl. I appreciate that Pixar mixes it up once in a while to keep us guessing and most works based on adaptations are at a major disadvantage because they don’t have that option.

PS: I apologize if any of my recollections of Up are incorrect. It has been quite some time since I’ve seen it.

By: Wings

Wings — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:41:55 +0000

I have always disliked adaptations of books, mainly because (a) they’re just another way to try and steal the money of readers and (b) they tend to suck horribly and taint the book for me forever. True, there are exceptions, but all the other failures just poison it for me.

- Wings

By: Contra Glove

Contra Glove — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 11:46:24 +0000

Basing films on novels has one major weakness: the novels’ length.

Films are the equivalent of short stories, and novels are the equivalent of limited-run television shows. Novels, like television shows, can spread things out and develop them, whereas films, like short stories, have to wrap it all up in a short time — neither form can go off on tangents (to be fair, films can squeeze in a little more because they don’t have to describe scenes with words, but the limitations regarding plotting still stand.)

By: B. Mac

B. Mac — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 05:49:02 +0000

COMMENTER: When giving a positive review, many will say things like “despite its comic book origins,” or “leaping beyond comic books,” as if being based on a comic book is in some way a handicap.

B. MAC: Actually, I think being based on a comic book (or a novel or TV show or anything else) is a handicap for a movie.

That said, I’d find it refreshing if more critics mentioned being based on a novel as a handicap. I’ll look into this later, but my initial guess is that comic book-adapted movies over the past ~10 years have performed as well or perhaps even better than novel-based movies on Rotten Tomatoes.

There aren’t too many comic book movies as wretched as Battlefield Earth, Cheaper by the Dozen, Gods and Generals (one of the most hilariously bad movies of the decade*), the Twilight movies, Sahara, Eragon, the Golden Compass, A.I., The Man Who Knew Too Little, or anything from Dan Brown. Hell, being based on a GOOD novel or epic poem wasn’t sufficient for Beowulf, Troy or Journey to the Center of the Earth.

*Paraphrasing one review: “General Jackson bursts into prayer like characters in a musical burst into song.”