Comic book movies: salvation or destruction?

topic posted Fri, February 6, 2004 - 8:57 PM by  iZach
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
My opinion is that, while it's cool seeing these characters portrayed in Hollywood format, and that the publicity comics are getting because of it is good, these movies are the wrong kinds of movies. They are dumb, unimportant, unintelligent novelties, and will only serve, in the long run, to undermine the truly brilliant comics already written, and of those yet to be.
posted by:
iZach
Canada
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Unsu...
     

    Re: Comic book movies: salvation or destruction?

    Fri, February 6, 2004 - 9:30 PM
    Aww. I agree that the effort taken from comic to film as a whole comes up pretty short. It seemed to work well with taking and unknown like Christopher Reeve way back when to portray Superman for instance, but they are more focused on the person that's going to put asses in the seats now.

    I'm looking forward to Christian Bale as Batman actually and I didn't think I would care about the character anymore after that long repeated travesty.

    The Catwoman concept now however completely disgusts me. It's basically assasinating the whole icon. That I will not see.

    Hellboy looks like a fine attempt too. Constantine, I'm just plain wary.

    In a way though, I'm glad they are billed as blockbusters. I think people tend to through away the comic genre as whole as kid-like or not worthy, and in a way, this gives it more respect even if the product isn't necessarily what the diehards want to see. It is ultimately reaching a wider audience.
    • Re: Comic book movies: salvation or destruction?

      Fri, February 6, 2004 - 10:39 PM
      Yes, but in reaching wider audience, are they sacrificing too much? is what i ask. I don't mean continuity issues, or changing costumes or something, i'm talking about the quality of the story. Sure iconic heores like SPider-man et al have never had much of a literary reputation, but Hellboy, Constantine, From Hell (I liked it) and especially League of Extra. Gentelmen have some literary merit to be salvaged. Blockbusters do not give respect. Spy Kids 3D was billed as a blockbuster. Then again, so was the Matrix, lord of the rings, and countless other excellent, excellent films.

      P.S. Catwoman was an icon?
      • Unsu...
         

        Re: Comic book movies: salvation or destruction?

        Fri, February 6, 2004 - 11:24 PM
        Yes. Because the process of getting the information out is as intrinsically important as the product itself. It's not as if they aren't getting people who don't care about the content, in fact they are. Raimi, Lee, Singer, Smith...all of these people have grown up with this material and care about it. Putting something onscreen is another process that is situational and has compromises of its own. Which does not mean, they shouldn't strive for making it come to life because of these trade offs. A blockbuster is a huge undertaking so it does start off with some amount of respect.

        From Hell I didn't care for but I think the Hughes brothers took a chance to do something different so I don't fault them in experimenting.

        I certainly believe Spider-Man did gain a favorable literary reputation in the modern age of comics. Ross & Stracynski both.

        League was a horrible rendition for me. The entire structure was conformed to fit an ego such as Connery's and everything suffered. That trade off I did not need nor desire.

        I think Matrix as a stand alone was great.

        Um, yes. How is she not an icon, really? Unless you and I have different ideas of the word itself.
  • Unsu...
     

    Re: Comic book movies: salvation or destruction?

    Tue, February 10, 2004 - 3:24 AM
    Guess Im the only one who likes todays comic movies? I just like the experiance, while it may not be moving or epic, I find comic movies fun.

    Sad as it is, I prefer a bunch of sub par comic movies, rather than none at all. I just dont know how a comic movie will please everyone, its just not possible.
  • Re: Comic book movies: salvation or destruction?

    Tue, February 10, 2004 - 3:31 PM
    I think a part of the problem is the source material they have been drawing from ( with the exception of League of Ext. Gent. ).

    Daredevil is a fun comic to read, at times it was mature in its depictions of the ravages of being poor or a drug addict, but the storyline they chose was an action flick.

    I liked the second X-Men film more then the first because it dealt with a lot of the prejudice and fear issues from the comic better I thought then the first movie did.

    Spider-Man I think would make a better tv series then a movie, it would likely be targeted at teens and could be decent and topical if they based it more off of the Ultimate Spider-Man run recently.

    League of Extraordinary Gentleman could have been brilliant. But to do so I think it would have had to have been four or five hours long to stay true to the comic and slow moving for parts of it. I thought it was somewhat doomed when I heard they had signed Connery for it, even if it had been good I would have been seeing Connery in every seen and not his character.

    I want to see Maus made into a movie. Get WETA Digital to do the graphical magic of making the characters into mice or cats, make it three hours long. Include Spiegelman's dialogues with his father as sort of tension relieving break-points. It could be brilliant and would be a work of art.

    But it won't happen, because Hollywood thinks comics are kids-fare and make good action movies, not insightful dramas.
  • Re: Comic book movies: salvation or destruction?

    Tue, February 15, 2005 - 11:15 PM
    You can never capture an image on film like you can draw it on the comic page - that's the first strike for Hollywood- Also compression of the story as film is an expensive medium and recovering costs needs make the film accesible to as vast an audience as possible but the result often is the loss of what could have been a minor/major cinema classic - take a look at the League - it could have been a classic if they stuck to the original story and structure- the same goes for From Hell - the same could be said for DD which was too corny at times- The only current three films which work are X-men 1 n 2, SPiderman 1 n 2 and my personal favourite which is a true comic book film HULK.... While i personally buy comics for the writing I would argue that what redeems the comic viz a viz the movie is the tone of the comic has to be bought out on the screen.... it's not just the atmosphere/environment but the quirkiness that makes a League the League or American Flagg, American Flagg.... Hollywood films sanitise those quirks loosing out on creating or mimicing something that has an identity by itself - THIER LOSS not Ours coz i got the books in my cupboard and can pull them out when i wish but what about those who can't afford them or have no access to them - will they think that th ecomics booksare as juvenile as the film (I have to keep defending the League) - Wait till I get to make a comic book film -I say

Recent topics in "ComicSaurus"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
Sacramento comic creators make it to TOP 10 in Worldwide Compe... ECV Press 0 August 17, 2008
FREE Watchmen 'motion comic' episode download on iTunes!!! Unsubscribed 0 July 17, 2008
Hi Rianna 0 April 13, 2008
artist wanted cruzzin 0 October 14, 2007