Comic book material should never take itself seriously, apparently!?

[PromethianSpark]

MovieBob said in his latest video about the Amazing Spiderman 2 that comic book material taking itself seriously is some how a hipster thing. I on the other hand have become increasingly aggravated by what seems to be the trendy go to for the comic enthusiast/media critic. The assertion that comic book material should never take itself seriously and should always endeavor to return to that silly period where it new what it was etc etc....

I am, by the way, not defending the new Spiderman franchise. I think it is appalling. But I don't think that it fails because it is not a sam rami camp fest. In fact, it strikes me as though this increasingly common sentiment among critics is actually what is truly 'Hipster'. It is basically saying, "eugh.... why cant comic books and their respective spin off movies get back to the roots, you know, before other people began to like them....because you know, I liked that band before they where cool and sold out! My critical understanding of comic books is better than yours."

Seriously, when you hear the likes of Doger expressing this opinion, you have to imagine she started reading comics in the 90s right. But wait! Comic books where horrible in the 90s don't you know!? Must distance myself from them, and adopt condescending and quirky opinions. Hipster 101.

Just remember, MovieBob almost went as far as saying Spiderman 3 was instant fail because Venom was choosen to be in it, not because of the treatment of the character, just the mere presence of him.

/rant

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I think that comic books are silly and if a movie intends to be faithful to the source material of its comic book roots than it also needs to have some silliness in it. Not necessarily a huge amount mind you, but it does need to be highly self-aware (which is where the current batch of Marvel movies stand).

That doesn't necessarily mean that comic book movies HAVE to be silly and can't be serious in the slightest, but it does mean that a serious movie based on a comic book would have to hugely tamper with the material in order for it to work, see the Nolan Batman movies (and how the 3rd movie, the most comic booky one of the trilogy, was the worst).

Of course, when movies deviate from their comic books' source material people who are fans of the comics get miffed about it because they feel like their hobby is getting disrespected. They fail to realize that comic books don't exactly respect themselves, which is why they're so silly in the first place.

 

[Vault101]

snip.

Batman comics tend to be pretty damn serious...

 

[shrekfan246]

Yeah, this whole "Comic book films aren't allowed to be serious!" attitude is really putting me off of quite a lot of things and people these days.

Don't get me wrong, I like the camp-factor of Batman & Robin just as much as I like the grim realistic seriousness of The Dark Knight, but I'm sick of seeing people say what amounts to "The only good superhero movies are the Marvel ones because they're 'fun'!" I get it, people are tired of 'grimdark', but neither silliness nor seriousness make or break a film.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

snip.

Batman comics tend to be pretty damn serious...

Only from the 90s onwards. Same thing with pretty much every comic book character.

Hell, half the characters in the Batman universe comment on how silly the entire premise of Batman is. He's a billionaire who dresses up like a bat, wears tights, and punches criminals that include a clown and a man who looks like a penguin.

 

[jademunky]

Batman comics tend to be pretty damn serious...

Well, Adam West notwithstanding

 

[Soviet Heavy]

snip.

Batman comics tend to be pretty damn serious...

Spoiler

Yeah, Batman was always a super dark ultra serious dude.

 

[Vault101]

Yeah, Batman was always a super dark ultra serious dude.

[i/]"tend to be"[/i] not [i/]"always were"[/i]

Hell, half the characters in the Batman universe comment on how silly the entire premise of Batman is. He's a billionaire who dresses up like a bat, wears tights, and punches criminals that include a clown and a man who looks like a penguin.

anything can sound silly if you frame it a certain way

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Yeah, Batman was always a super dark ultra serious dude.

[i/]"tend to be"[/i] not [i/]"always were"[/i]

Hell, half the characters in the Batman universe comment on how silly the entire premise of Batman is. He's a billionaire who dresses up like a bat, wears tights, and punches criminals that include a clown and a man who looks like a penguin.

anything can sound silly if you frame it a certain way

Except it's always been silly. The only reason we take it seriously is because we're told we're supposed to take it seriously, that and because it makes sense within the internal logic of the comic book universe.

I mean hey, I love Batman, I grew up on a steady diet of the DC animated universe (which basically cemented the dark gritty Batman in the minds of my generation), but you need to step back and look at the big picture. Most of the characters in the Batman universe were created long before Batman was re-branded as a dark and serious character, and no matter what you do that's not going to change. And you can't even say that Batman comics "tend to be" serious since Batman was created in the 1939, and didn't go all grim dark until the 1990s, which is a hell of a longer time period than 1990-2014.

Not only that, but even the darker Batman comics of today are still pretty damn silly. They aren't silly in the Adam West kind of way, but they're still damn silly. I mean come on have you seen Batman: The Return of Bruce Wayne? It has Bruce Wayne time traveling from the past to the present and fighting cavemen and pirates and cowboys after Final Crisis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_The_Return_of_Bruce_Wayne

 

[JimB]

MovieBob said in his latest video about the Amazing Spider-Man 2 that comic book material taking itself seriously is some how a hipster thing.

Wait, he did? Which video is that?

 

[Rellik San]

It's not that comic book movies shouldn't be serious, it's more that, comic book movies should stop being serious all the time.

I always found it funny, but a lot of comics that tackle serious issues tend not to take themselves too seriously unless they really have to, I'll give a few examples:

Next WAVE - Deals with the concept of super hero identikit persona's and how many characters can lose themselves in those... and is completely bonkers.

Transmetropolitan - Zany over the top and hideously cartoonish and it's about journalistic integrity and how it's important to always see the world for what it is, not what you're told it is.

Empowered - A sexy superhero romp that deals with the pressures of modern relationships, fame through the lens of net culture and sexism in all aspects of life.

Dirty Pair (after Torren Smith stopped writing them) - Transhumanism and identity in a world where a personality on a chip can over ride a real human mind.


Ok ok, so the works of Alan Moore could benefit from a few more laughs, but the point is, as many others have pointed out most notably Jim Sterling: Pathos for a character is only found when that character has the full gamut of emotions, if they are sad all the time, it means nothing when they are said. We need moments of levity to break up the action and if you watch the grimly serious Nolan Batman movies, in Begins and Dark Knight there are a ton of these little characterful moments of levity that are almost entirely missing from Rises, those moments help inform us of who Bruce Wayne is, how he interacts with people and why he doesn't lose himself and turn into a psychopath.

But it's not just that; comics themselves are inherently goofy affairs... 90% of the best ones are anyway. Full of costumes, super powers, conspiracies, bowel disrupters, super computers, time travel, alternate universes... but most of all humanity, it's that humanity that makes them great and when you watch something as visually impressive as Man of Steel, you can't help but feel just how much of that humanity is missing, not because it's so dark, but because it doesn't let you feel anything for these characters beyond their obvious allegories, like a lot of Snyders and even Nolans work, there doesn't seem to be any kind of human element at all.

And humans are funny, serious, tragic, heroic, right, wrong and absolutely perfect in our flaws and that's something so many films seem to forget.



Well that or they completely balls up the characterisation and add stupid muzzle flashes to everything.

Also comics were mostly horrible in the 90's... seriously... Witchblade, Spawn and Rob Liefeld that's all I'm gonna say (although Darkness was cool... oddly enough coolest when it wasn't being super grim dark and allowed Jackie Estacado to actually be a character).

 

[Lieju]

I think a Superhero movie can be fantastical and fun, but also thought-provoking, interesting, and touching.

The problem I have is with movies that are ashamed of their origins, instead of embracing them. Then you get stuff like Galactus being a big cloud, because oh, no, the audience can't take a big dude in a silly hat seriously.

Well write it better then. Establish a world where that kind of stuff happens, and that has characters we care about.

I do read comics (or graphic novels) that are more realistic, and it fits some stuff. But generally I read Superhero comics for outlandish stuff.

 

[Shiftygiant]

And you can't even say that Batman comics "tend to be" serious since Batman was created in the 1939, and didn't go all grim dark until the 1990s, which is a hell of a longer time period than 1990-2014.

First, the 90's is when the dark age began. We had serious comics before that, it was the bronze age.

Second, Batman was a serious character in 1939. You just have to read the first Batman stories to see this, given how he was just a pulp hero in sequential art form. He only became camp with the Silver Age when his grim and dark stories were scrutinized by the CCA, and later because the TV show. To say he was not serious until the 90's is an insult to Denny O'Neil and the work he did.

I do agree however that their should be a sense of fun, as Serious all the time is boring. Their can be a lot of humor about a rich guy who dresses up as a bat and beats up clowns.

 

[MrBaskerville]

I'm one of those people that have a hard time taking superheroes seriously, probably why i didn't like The Dark Knight (Too brooding and self serious) while i enjoyed Rises because it allowed itself to be a bit more campy and silly. But i have no problem with non-superhero comics being serious, stuff like Black Hole is still some of the best comic related material i have read. It's just when people start dressing up in silly costumes to fight over-the-top villians it needs a bit of self-irony imo. The sweet spot is probably somewhere between early days of comics and the 90s crap, not too silly and not too brooding.

 

[Axolotl]

Second, Batman was a serious character in 1939. You just have to read the first Batman stories to see this, given how he was just a pulp hero in sequential art form. He only became camp with the Silver Age when his grim and dark stories were scrutinized by the CCA

That's really not true. I mean one of the earliest Batman stories (as in before Robin of the Joker were introduced) had him fighting a guy who thought he was a reincarnation of Napoleon who used a death ray equipped blimp to blow up New York.

Batman has always been silly. He was silly in the beginning he was silly in the Silver Age, he was silly in the Bronze Age, he was silly when Miller wrote him, Silly in the Dark Age and he's damn silly in the Morrison run.

 

[Auberon]

I wouldn't exactly call Crazy Steve silly... though I presume you mean Miller when he was actually good writer.

Morrison loves his Silver Age, so most of his cape stuff is inevitably silly in some form according to his favored eras. Then you get stuff like Invisibles, where he uses I don't know how many pantheons and philosophies.

 

[Something Amyss]

snip.

Batman comics tend to be pretty damn serious...

At the end of the day, it's still a guy dressed up like a flying mouse. Goofy as HELL.

anything can sound silly if you frame it a certain way

Yes, but some don't need to be framed at all. Like, as a random example for no apparent reason, Batman.

Yeah, this whole "Comic book films aren't allowed to be serious!" attitude is really putting me off of quite a lot of things and people these days.

I didn't know this was a thing until the last couple of days. I mean, seriously, this is a thing?

On the other hand, I would argue some premises aren't supposed to be serious, and really, a lot of comics do sort of fall in there. I just don't think it's a mandate.

Wait, he did? Which video is that?

I think what he actually said was quite the opposite, where he was defending the "genuine emotion" of the Raimi films by accusing anyone of calling them camp of being an emo hipster.

And those movies, in between emo moments, are camp. They're Sam Raimi movies. It's a given.

Then you get stuff like Galactus being a big cloud, because oh, no, the audience can't take a big dude in a silly hat seriously.

As opposed to a guy gliding around on a cosmic surfboard and Johnny Storm becoming Captain Planet.

But seriously, Galactus was supposed to be revealed in the Silver Surfer movie. Supposedly, they didn't want to waste the big reveal on FF: Rodents of Unusual Size, so they went the V'Ger route.

Second, Batman was a serious character in 1939. You just have to read the first Batman stories to see this, given how he was just a pulp hero in sequential art form.

And "pulp heroes" were frequently silly.

Don't get me wrong, I love the pulps. I love things inspired by the pulps. I love pulp ripoffs. But pulp heroes were often ridiculous and silly (so...fun?) and many of the aspects that make superheroes ridiculous and silly were derived from the pulps.

Hell, Doc Savage had a Fortress of Solitude before that other Superman did.

Pulp fiction was often goofy, and that's okay.

 

[Something Amyss]

I wouldn't exactly call Crazy Steve silly...

That's the problem. They thought he was silly. Then he went and abducted a child acrobat and forced him to kill rats.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Not 'comic book material', but 'super hero comic book material'. And not 'never take it serious', but 'never take it serious at the detriment of what made it fun'.

The (first two) Raimi Spider-Man movies can be taken serious at a good number of moments, but never to the point that they stop being about a guy who got bit by a radio active spider, and swings around the city in a costume. The Nolan Batman movies on the other hand did their best to excuse all that silly super hero nonsense with uber realism. After all, why would people go to a super hero movie to watch super heroes?