Comic book fans: What irks you the most about Superhero films

What pisses me off about them is that comics start to get their inspiration from the movies rather than the other way around. Have you guys read any ironman books lately? They might have well made his secret identity Robert Downey Jr.

First thing that irks me is the fans. "They hired ________ to play________? He'll ruin the character!!!!" Michael Keaton was known for Beetlejuice at the time and people thought he would screw it up. I admit I liked his Batman but Bruce left a lot to be desire. He was more like Clark Kent around people that a multi-billionaire playboy. Heath Ledger. Lots of people didn't think he would be a great Joker. Oscar and a great psycho Joker. He made Jack look normal. Give the actors a chance to play the part out and then judge the performance.

The writers who take a perfectly good back story or origin and screw it up to fit their ideas of what it should be. The Wonder Woman pilot (I saw it when it was posted online) sucked big time. They pretty much left out Diana's origin and reinvent who she was. If it has worked for the fans since the character first came out then don't change it. Nolan's Dark Knight did flesh out a part of his past that many have wondered about so it was good to see. Man of Steel was a good change from what we've had up to now with many parts expanded.

Reviewers are next because many of them wear their hatred of comic books on their sleeves. They've looked down on the media as made for the lowest common denominator. Can they go to a movie and watch it for the fun and thrill of the ride? Never over think comics.

Finally, back to the fans again. The over-reaction to the end of Man of Steel just made me laugh. This isn't your father's or grandfather's Superman. This is a re-imaged one. Maybe that incident was what made him come up with the pledge about life. If you read the Injustice comics you saw how far it took to push that Superman to the edge enough to take a life.

I've always gone to movies based on my favorite comic books or TV shows to see what they do to bring it to the screen. Some have disappointed (Hulk) and others have been better than I thought (DK Trilogy). But in the end I let the other people have their freak outs and fits over things they love. As a Doctor Who fan I've seen eleven changes to him and each one is as good as the one before because what is brought to the table by those who do the show.

Yes and no, of course money is a factor but with the Marvel products they seemed to have found the right balance of keeping the marvel characters and brand at the forefront. Not that they haven't made mis-steps along the way, Ang Lee's Hulk is an example of a talented director on the wrong project.

I can't wait for the other Marvel properties to return back to them.

SOME SPOILERS




Oh... wow... this is my new favourite thread of ever.

First let me start by saying that Marvel films have, for the most part, been doing it right lately and they've been doing their best, for the most part, to keep their films true to the source material in both spirit and in the finer points.

Warner Bros., on the other hand, doesn't deserve the license to make films for DC. Everything they've released, EVER, is an utter travesty in one way or another, even the Nolan trilogy despite them being films of an acceptable quality. The characters are total spiritual abortions. They disregard the mythos entirely, in some cases, opting instead to re-invent everything. They don't care about the people who actually really care about the characters or stories at all. Finally, they couldn't give less of a **** about the small but important details.

Spiritual Abortions
You don't need to go far to see examples of this so I'll start with the Nolan trilogy.The fact that it's basically an Elseworld's story has been touched upon so I won't go more in depth on that but Nolan's Batman is a whiny turd who gives up on crime-fighting when a romantic interest dies. Bale does an excellent job portraying the character as Nolan directed it but the character is not that of Batman. He's not cold. He's not calculating. He's an emo ***** who wouldn't be jack **** if it wasn't for Lucius Fox. Christ... Lucius Fox is more Batman than Batman is in the Nolan trilogy. He'd probably fight more like Batman too, since Bale ends up moving like a ******* rock-em-sock-em robot whenever it's time to throw down. Also, Nolan's Alfred is a similarly whiny *****, which is no fault of Michael Caine. Just compare the trilogy's Alfred,


(Also, that dialog is -********- from a script writing perspective. Show... don't tell... Like a bloody well needed one of the corniest lines in film history to let me know Alfred was choked up...)

with the actually accurate and believably stoic and utterly kickass Alfred from TDKR: Part 2.


(Also, how... the HELL... does the score from the DC Animated Originals consitently dominate the overproduced trash they put in the Hollywood versions?)

This kind of crap has happened in every single DC Hollywood film ever made. In fact, the Nolan trilogy is probably the MOST accurate adaptation to date outside of the DC Animated Universe. Don't even get me started on the atrocity that is Man of Steel again.

Disregard For Mythos
Nolan trilogy: Complete re-invention of Bane, "Robin," Batman, Ra's Al Ghul, the relationship between Lucius Fox and Bruce Wayne, and the complete dismissal of Harvey Dent/Two Face as a throwaway character.

Man of Steel: Every single detail aside from the names and basic appearance.

Green Lantern: I'm gonna take a second on this... because this was ********. They took one of the single most epic aspects of comics history and flushed it down the toilet. Who's bright idea was it to introduce Parallax as a trash bad-guy in film one with the cheesiest most detached backstory possible? Hal Jordan's corruption at the hands of Parallax, subsequent betrayal of the GL Corps, and final retribution/catharsis IS A ******* TRILOGY GOLDMINE IN ITSELF! They crammed what is one of the most epic GL story into one horrible 1.5hr film ><;



The damn trilogy writes itself! You can hammer a phenomenal script for these off in a matter of weeks! That is... until the "Hollywood Scriptkillers" get their hands on them.

Lack of Concern for Actual Fans
Hollywood Scriptkillers are the bright-idea folk who see a gem like Schindler's List and say something like "Y'know it's not bad boyo but I think it needs more romance! Yeah! An action and adventure! And something for the kids!!!" The decision makers at Warner Bros. don't give a steaming donkey turd about comics. All they care about is film and toy revenue... which means targetting as broad of an audience as possible no matter how terrible it ends up making the finished product (eg. Man of Steel). Instead of trying to make a good product that people will fall in love with until the end of time and hold close to their hearts as a pinnacle of deep belief and emotion, they want to sucker you into opening night sales with INSANE marketing campaigns (again, eg. Man of Steel).

The Important Details
Let me ask you guys something... If you have a budget of several hundred million dollars to make a film, or you're a director/actor with a payroll in the millions, how bloody much is it to ask of people to die their ******* hair to the appropriate color and to wear coloured contacts? Yeah... they're uncomfortable.... I get it... The actors make enough money doing a job lots of people would kill for that I can't really find it in my heart to care. Let's compare:

Batman/Bruce Wayne: Black hair, blue eyes with a form fitting, yet fluid fabric for the uniform that provides protection without inhibiting mobility. Pictured below: Clearly not any of those things.



Green Arrow/Oliver Queen: Green eyes, blonde hair. Brown eyes and brown hair is pretty close, right?



There are countless more examples of this sort of thing but this is a good easy one. Now, you might say I'm nitpicking with this but these fine details are extremely important in the DCU and it's a deep nuance for pretty much all of the characters. Also, with the presence of metagenes taking more prevalence as a source of metahuman ability, these sorts of genetic markers serve a simple role in helping us believe the details of the fantastical DC Universe. Most heroes and metahumans have extremely rare hair and eye colour combinations such as jet black hair and bright blue eyes. Also, in Green Arrow's case, pure blonde hair (well into adulthood) is extremely rare, especially when combined with emerald green eyes.

How Do We Fix the Problem (for DC films at least)?

Stop blindly financially supporting comic films. Producers know damn well that this **** sells like hotcakes because of all the fanboys and hype. Just stop pre-ordering tickets and stop giving hacks your hard earned money. If you're an actual comic fan than the DC Animated Universe is where it's at anyways. The people who make incredible films like TDKR:


And The Flashpoint Paradox:



Deserve way more respect, credit, and money than the geniuses that keep bringing us such screenwriting gems as: "There's only one way this ends, Kal: Either you die, or I do."

Ok, that's fine. I thought the weird smelly orange huge headed dude was impossible as well as the guy who's disfigurement made his skin look almost like stone was impossible too. Also, I thought the person Elijah Wood played was a bit faster than humanly possible (from my memory... I only saw it once... so I'm foggy on that part).

I have to disagree on some of those points as hair color or eye color rarely play a large part in the character's background to me. The comic book Batman costume uses a lot of artistic license from the way the cape flows to the skin tight outfit that doesn't restrict movement and yet is bulletproof, even the batcowl is a problem. I'm glad Nolan tried to use "real-world" combat armor, I do wish they used his comic book color scheme like in the Arkham games instead of the boring mostly black costume.

Ben Affleck has black hair!

They may not be a big deal for you but they're still very important. Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent have identical hair an eye colour: ultra rare black hair with jet blue eyes. This both highlights their characters' similarities and accentuates their differences. Bruce also has the exact same hair and I colour as Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, and Tim Drake, making it easier for him to see himself in them and their own unique tragedies.Wonder Woman... black hair and blue eyes. Zatanna... black hair and blue eyes. Giovanni Zatara... black hair, blue eyes. Superboy... black hair, blue eyes. Captain Marvel... black hair, blue eyes. Huntress... black hair, blue eyes. Black Canary black hair (she dyes it blonde) and blue eyes. If it wasn't for the fact that this is such an incredibly, cocksmashingly rare hair/eye combination it wouldn't be AS big of a deal, but hair an eye colour remain an important device in comics, especially in the DC Universe. As you can see, these are all of the most stoic DC heroes, both in their jobs as heroes and in their personal lives. These heroes are often difficult to relate to.

The one's that break the mold are more human and liberal in their secret identities and typically less extreme in their jobs as heroes as well, while still taking them seriously. Eg. Booster Gold, Barry Allen, Ralph Dibny, Arthur Curry, Ted Kord, Oliver Queen, etc. These heroes are SIGNIFICANTLY more easily related to as human beings on a regular basis. In Marvel, Peter Parker has very generic brown hair and brown eyes. This is an extremely important aspect of his character as he's meant to be an everyman, which is mentioned when he's unmasked by Vulture who comments on his generic appearance stating that there's no way he'd ever figure out who he was and that he could be anybody.

Typically, the more common a heroes hair/eye combo the more relateable they are. Ted Kord and Peter-Parker are,arguably, by far the most relateable heroes, while all of DC's black/blue pack are quite unrelatable. The relatability factor is an important one because it sends an intentional message that impacts us both consciously and subconsciously. When we look at Peter Parker or Ted Kord we think "this guy's kinda a shmuck... but I get him... that could be me and he handles all this crap the same way I or any other normal dude would in the same situation." When we look at Batman, we're not supposed to think "oh, yeah, I get this guy. I could do that." We should be thinking "holy crap... holy crap... holy crap.... I get where he's coming from on this but how the hell does he do it? I could never do that! NO ONE could ever do that!" If Batman looked like Peter Parker or Ted Kord... you wouldn't be thinking that. Hair and eye colour, and overall general appearance, are a significant aspect of our day to day lives as humans, no matter what our overly-PC society has raised everyone to believe.

There are other little nuances, like how characters with green eyes tend to be more guileful (Green Arrow, Catwoman, Lex Luthor). Then there's the more obvious comparisons. Green Arrow's eyes are green because, of course they are, he's Green Arrow... but more than that, he's extremely close friends with Green Lantern. Booster Gold and Ted Kord are probably the two most "everyman" heroes in DC, with more common hair/eyes to match, and they're best friends with, at times, cooky "holy-crap-we're-superheroes-ahhhhhh-wtf!" antics. Lex Luthor's emerald green eyes are juxtaposed with kryptonite, emphasizing his threat as a nemesis to Superman.

Bottom line, disregarding something simple like hair/eye colour is disregarding a major thematic element, especially in the DCU. Mentally imagine every hero with brown hair and brown eyes and tell me it doesn't make an insane difference, especially with regards to the contrasts and comparisons and relationships between characters. A comic book is a visual media wherein even the slightest details are relevant. Failing to transfer the basics to the big screen tends to result in failing to transfer the overall spirit to the big screen, which makes for both poor adaptations and bad cinema overall.

All those black hair and blue eyes probably have more to do with the early days of the printing process for colored comics, than something that was planned. They probably just stuck with it over the years. But I don't see those as being as iconic as the original Grey Hulk accidentally turning to Green because of a coloring mistake, and Stan Lee liking and keeping the change.


I just use a color wheel to determine why some heroes and villains are colored the way they are... The villains main color is usually on the opposite half of the hero's but not necessarily the polar opposite. They're some fun ways to interpret shared colors as well. And of course individual colors can have their own meanings like green for jealousy or purple for kingly.

Superman's costume colors are Red, Blue, Yellow
Lex Luthor's classic armor colors are Green (Red's Opposite), Purple (Yellow's opposite). He's actually has been depicted as having reddish-orange hair (almost Blue's opposite).

Thor and Loki share the same color scheme motif, Blue and Red opposing Green and Yellow (or gold color?), they also both share yellow (half-brothers?).

X-men's Blue and Gold vs Magneto's Red and Violet.

Origin stories for ubber popular characters (seriously does anyone not know superman's origin?) and casting extremely famous people to play superhero's. I don't care if Cage actually did give a good performance as ghost rider (which he didn't) i would never be able to buy him as that character simply because I've seen him in to many other things.

Easy answer..i HATE when movies and tv shows change established FACTS about a character..2 examples the new Arrow show takes place in Starling City...the Green Arrow lived in STAR CITY FOR DECADES....now its Starling City...who the F**K thought ANY OF THAT MATTERED...why is Marvels Fury a black guy...FOR DECADES he was white..before he was a superhero he was a military/war comic hero...who was white...now hes black...WHY!!!??? (please understand im not trying to be rascist..or anything for that matter...black heroes..women heroines..even gay supers...EVERYONE should be able to be a hero..in real life as well as comics...but if for HALF A CENTURY you were a white character...why change...if you need a black superhero you dont change Captain Americas race...you create The Falcon...or Static...or Icon...jus' sayin'...)

I expect that'll be renaming Starling City to Star City post season 1 catacylsm. As soon as I heard Starling City and saw the symbol on the list I anticipated this so I'll be very surprised if they don't take things in that direction. At any rate, be patient on that one I'd say.

With regards to Nick Fury, much of the Marvel film universe is based around the "Ultimate" series of comics released almost specifically to groom Marvel comics for cinema. Nick Fury is not only black in these titles, he's also essentially identical to Samuel L. Jackson in every way. The "Ultimate" reboot makes the films' Fury probably the truest adaptation there's ever been of a comic character lol as Nick Fury even said, as a joking nod to the films to come, that if there was ever a movie about him Samuel L. Jackson would play him.

Ehhh...I don't have a problem with film-makers changing stuff around. Nolan's Batman is not the same as the comic Batman (seriously downplaying the fantastic elements like Bane's Venom and the Lazarus Pits), but it told a pretty good story. By demystifying the Batman mythos I felt that we got a depiction of Batman which people could connect to. The emotional strain of a double life, the loss of loved ones, the physical burden of being a vigilante...but in the end he still saves the day. Personally I think the Robin bit at the end was a random shout out and didn't really add anything to the film, but that's about the only real problem I have with it.

What bothers me is when they just grab some random (from their perspective) comic book title and make a mediocre film out of it. That's just a waste of everyone's time.

I don't understand this constant comparison of former actors to Ben Affleck. Michael Keaton didn't have some huge career full of hit movies where he looked/sounded/acted like the same guy in all of them. Same with Heath Ledger. Keaton had like 3 hits before Batman (Johnny Dangerously... which I'm being very generous in calling that a hit, but I thought it was funny... Mr. Mom... never saw it... and Beetlejuice, which was excellent). There were others, but they were certainly not hit films. As for Ledger, he had even MORE films under his belt than Keaton, but I didn't see ANY of them. They all looked boring (including Brokeback Mountain). Maybe I never gave him a chance in his other movies.

But my point is this: everyone knows Ben Affleck & everyone knows a lot of movies he's been in because he's been in a LOT of movies. So many that pretty much everyone has seen all his acting styles & mannerisms.

But screw ALL of that. I don't like Ben Affleck. Like, as a human. He is to the film industry what pop musicians are to the music industry (like Brittney Spears or Justin Timberlake). What's great about being a human, is I don't have to have an excuse for what I like or don't like. I'm me & there's nothing you can do to stop me.

CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU MIGHT THINK:

Going to the see the film in theaters to "judge his performance" does exactly nothing to tell Hollywood whether or not you actually liked the movie. Why? Because they have your money. Them getting your money = "Hi, I really liked this movie, it was super duper" That's the big joke. Why do you think they keep saying "you can't judge until you see it." ??? Because they'll still get your money.
Go ahead & ***** in a forum afterward, Hollywood doesn't care & they won't go look. If they didn't respond to the fact that a damn Presidential Petition was started to stop this from happening, then they aren't going to care what anyone thinks of the movie AFTER they've paid to see it. Because the whole point of making the movie (to get your money) has been transacted & is done with by the time you go ***** about it & say it was trash.
So, I won't see the movie & pay for it until the following happens:
(1. Other people tell me it's SOOOOO freaking good & I won't be disappointed.
(2. I've seen it FOR FREE & actually liked it a lot.
Then I'll pay for it.

His hair looks brown to me.

But I totally agree, I'm ready for a more form fitting looking batsuit. There's no excuse to NOT have one now. Has everyone seen THIS technology? - http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/n...an-steel-spider-silk-skin-takes-a-bullet.html

or how about THIS technology? - http://www.gizmag.com/mit-breakthrough-paper-thin-bullet-proof-armor/24971/

C'mon Hollywood. There's no excuse now. Can't say "that's not believable" because it already exists. Bruce Wayne has the type of money to make a freaking suit out of it.

More people need to realise this. Not just with films but in all forms of the entertainment industry. It's the dumbest mentality imaginable and doesn't translate to other purchases. We don't just blindly fork over money for other products before we even know if they're worth a damn so I wish people would stop doing it for films and games. STOP. SUPPORTING. HACKS. Stop giving yuppie douchetards money so they can live cushy Hollywood lifestyle riding on money most people could regret giving them. We have to start taking a more intelligent approach to the arts and understanding that our money represents our interests and control in them. I've been guilty of failing in this regard in the past as well. We all need to stop paying for a movie or game JUST because it has a character we like in it. This is especially true now that Hollywood knows exactly how to make the perfect trailer, even if the movie itself is garbage.

Obviously you've never been to Boston.

LOL, it's funny you say that, because I'm noticing that the opposite is true for most of society. People pay first & find out if they like it later in WAY too many purchases. Or, they're just flat out hypocritical right there in front of everyone. Like, the iPhone. People line up for the new one without even knowing what it's like. On top of that, people will be like "Apple! Stop treating your FoxConn workers like slaves!" ... they tweet... from their iPhone that they bought on day 1 of release.

Step back & really look at what most people do day to day with the choices they make & you'll feel like you're in the movie "They Live" or something. At the same time, the very same people will complain a out Capitalism, yet they've all been conditioned out of Capitalism completely & they don't even realize it. Buying an iPhone whilst complaining about how they treat their workers is NOT Capitalism. You're doing the opposite of what the idea of Capitalism purports to be.

Freaking strange days we're living in.

Correct. I have not been. Why does that matter?

I don't think it's "the right balance", but I will agree that Marvel Studios has proven to be far more on-the-right-track than many previous superhero film producers.

In some respects, this is one of the things that seems to be wrong with DCUO. It seems to be more intent on brining new adventures to the DC Universe rather than replaying new events - with the intervention of player characters. I'd love to see more flash-back to the past adventures.

An example of this :: I would really like to see a Powerman and Iron Fist movie the way that it would have been back when it was published. Powerman was practically Black Dynamite. It's a little hooky, but man what a film! Two guys with super powers running Heroes for Hire out of the upstairs of a movie theater, eating pizza, and walking the streets of NYC fighting crime doesn't sound any interesting than a television crime drama. But you know, the normal public wouldn't relate to Iron Fist's little yellow booties - that, ironically, Powerman would make fun of. It even includes love interests and strong female characters with the Daughters of the Dragon and other secondary characters.

So I think working so hard to make the concepts fresh and new takes away from what originally made the concepts great. I do understand that that making the comics fresh-and-new has been the trend in comics for heading on 20 years at this point. Comic companies today are practically as bad as the film industry on re-creating characters every couple of years. And that's pretty sad to me.

That's the infamous "I'm a tough guy from south boston" look.