Why are comic book fans so anal about super hero movies?

[Blow_Pop]

Most fans don't want the characters and story destroyed or dumbed down so a bunch of idiots with snotty-nosed six year olds can enjoy it while their kids wail like banshees.

..I am kind of irritable tonight...

irritable or not you have almost the whole point right there.

Because we have a set mindset of how the character should act. Their behaviors and tendencies affect their decisions and how their universe works. Also if you actually knew comic Deadpool, you'd understand why this version had so many fans outraged.

just like Anna Paquain never FELT like Rogue to me. Especially her running away in X2 or was it X3....? I don't remember but she WOULD NOT have done that. at least not for the bullshit reasons in the movie.

The vast majority of the time, any adaptation from one form of media to another involves removing/editing/bastardizing at least some parts of the story, and they're usually fairly important to the original story. It's just depressing to see something you really like transformed into a pile of shit by the transition.

like the actual vehicles in transformers being different? Bumblebee was not a fing 2010 Camaro he was a VW Bug

I can understand the furor some fans raise. I mean, if the movie-makers have to change a tiny little bit of information or something to make something comprehensible to those who don't know the source material, then that's tolerable. But when they completely derail characters or plotlines or what-have-you for that purpose - or worse, for no reason - then we've got a problem.

I don't mind the tiny changes its the big ones.

the problem is, and has always been, that people hold things like their favorite superheroes and characters very close to their heart, to the point where they think they own them. When someone messes up something you own and love, its hard not to take it personally

Someone else mentioned trying to create them. Well, I rarely and occasionally write fan fics. I have a friend who constantly does. Both of us have the same complaint. You have to understand the character to get into their heads when writing from their point of view. Its not easy. Especially when like you read the comics and better understand them, then go see the movie and the character is butchered. There are many things I can ***** about with the whole X Men franchise but I won't. The rants are over and done with. As well as the Spiderman movies.

Personally, I don't think I should have to watch someone DESTROY something I held near and dear to my heart as a child so that the general population can enjoy it. In other words I don't like people who have to dumb down a comic book or kids tv show for a movie and add in a bunch of unnecessary garbage.

Oh and Timeline. Don't even get me started on that. My favorite book destroyed by hollywood.

 

[iJosh]

They're fanboys of course. They are banal about pretty much everything.

This is the funniest typo I've seen all day. Accidental kudos!

Banal? I purposely put that.

 

[ix_tab]

They're fanboys of course. They are banal about pretty much everything.

This is the funniest typo I've seen all day. Accidental kudos!

Banal? I purposely put that.

Ahh man, I thought it was a clever mistake because of the title of the thread being about how comic fen are anal retentive.

Eh, it's still funny.

 

[Guitar Gamer]

Yeah,...... deadpool could have been alot better. I thought they did wolverine alright but I kinda almost yelled in the theater when I saw what deadpool was in that movie

 

[dwightsteel]

I am hearing two completely different reviews of the new Wolverine movie.

One side is going on and on about how it isn't faithful to the original story, Deadpool isn't done the right way, the action is campy, and on and on...

Yet I equally hear from veteran comic book fans that the movie exceeded their expectations.

I am unsure who to believe. Nonetheless I must pose the question: WHY are comic book fans so anal? I mean look at the Lord of the Rings movies. The fans of the books KNOW Tom Bombadil and so many others things were removed from the original story, yet most people tend to accept the movies. Why superhero movies never get this same respect is beyond me...

Anywho, your thoughts please.

My take on it is this:

As a comic book fan (and only a comic book fan), it did, in more than a few ways bastardize the origin of Wolverine. The whole Sabretooth is the brother was a big one.

Deadpool is beloved by most people who call themselves comic book fanboys. He epitomizes the anti-hero, minus the angst. He breaks the fourth wall with no remorse, and he's just funny. His portrayal, at least at the end, felt like a bit of a slap in the face (although, keep in mind, if you stayed after the credits, you MIGHT feel a little different).

The movie was campy and way over the top, which can be frowned upon by some.

As a summer blockbuster fan, It had explosions, it's story didn't totally fall flat, it didn't fail to entertain in the fashion I've come to expect from these types of movies.

As a mixture of both, was it perfect? No, far from it. But it was entertaining, and was far better then it could have been as spin-off flick. I think the dialogue in a lot of areas could have been fixed so it didn't sound so cheesy. I wish Deadpool had more screen time.

Was it a top notch superhero movie? No, especially not compared to flicks like Iron Man or the Dark Knight. But this movie was more than passable in my eyes. I can see why fanboys were butt hurt. But understand, these are the same folks who disliked all of the Blade flicks but the first one. As with most movies, you just have to make up your own damn mind. After all, I hated the Godfather.

 

[cathou]

i like wolverine movie actually. And i think most people forgot that they only have between 2 and 3 hours to tell a story, to people that havent read the comic (let's face it, they dont movies for huge fans, because then they would left out everybody that havent read the comics) so they dont really have time to go in depth on every character.

take deadpool for exemple. I know a bit about marvel, i know deadpool existed. but not much. I go see a wolverine movie. it,s roughly two hours. i dont want to see 45 minutes of who is deadpool, why does he think like he does, how cool he is, etc. it's a wolverine movie, not a deadpool movie! they only needed a vilain to battle wolverine and sabertooth, and they didnt had time to get on the motivations of that vilain. So they create that deadpool. Between that, or creating a totally new mutant that is not in marvel universe, i prefer that they use deadpool.

Anyway for all the marvel movies, you need to see them as an alternate timeline, like age of apocalypse for exemple. Because, you cannot put 40 years of comics into a couple of movies.

The same is true for every adaptation. People get anal over them because they dont realise that most of the people that will go see the movie, probably havent read the original material...

 

[Outcast107]

I thought the movie was ok. Nothing Great, but nothing bad. Some parts made it ...not so great, other parts did. Like the bathroom scene..my god that look so fake lol. But it did get me piss off to see deadpool like that, but as least he was "badass" in it. Though I think what some people are angry about is that deadpool is already badass, and doesn't really need anything added to him. But I just hope if they do come out with a deadpool movie, they keep it to the comics.

(I have not read any yet, but I am going to buy some soon.)

 

[GothmogII]

I think super heroes are totally gay. Because they have super powers because I have to think about powers being in conflict. Lame.

But not Conan the Barbarian, and he's from Marvel. I love Conan the Barbarian because he has muscles , and neither do most of the people he meets but those mages. And all he does every comic is drink, have sex and kill people. I like that because I don't have to think.

I read a Conan-Wolverine crossover comic, And all he does every comic is drink, have sex and kill people.

First off fixed for greater truth
0_o

Conan is a muscled ape...only without the fur and he has a sword...but not the plaent destroying powers of other hairless apes...*rim shot* ........yes.....bad I know....

And for your use of gay as a diss, you are twice gay than superman.
*rolls eyes*

ZOMG!!! attempt at humor FAIL!!!!

And that's actually the same thing, you're committing the same fallacy as the guy you quoted you know. Conan wasn't just a big dumb guy that wrestles and hits things in the original Robert E.Howard stories, yes he was a tough guy, but he was also known as a cunning strategist and person in general. It was the movies and many of the comics that bastardised him and turned him into a grunting murder machine, not that I don't like the films too mind you.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I think super heroes are totally gay. Because they have super powers because I have to think about powers being in conflict. Lame.

But not Conan the Barbarian, and he's from Marvel. I love Conan the Barbarian because he has muscles , and neither do most of the people he meets but those mages. And all he does every comic is drink, have sex and kill people. I like that because I don't have to think.

I read a Conan-Wolverine crossover comic, And all he does every comic is drink, have sex and kill people.

First off fixed for greater truth
0_o

Conan is a muscled ape...only without the fur and he has a sword...but not the plaent destroying powers of other hairless apes...*rim shot* ........yes.....bad I know....

And for your use of gay as a diss, you are twice gay than superman.
*rolls eyes*

ZOMG!!! attempt at humor FAIL!!!!

And that's actually the same thing, you're committing the same fallacy as the guy you quoted you know. Conan wasn't just a big dumb guy that wrestles and hits things in the original Robert E.Howard stories, yes he was a tough guy, but he was also known as a cunning strategist and person in general. It was the movies and many of the comics that bastardised him and turned him into a grunting murder machine, not that I don't like the films too mind you.

Like anything its how the story is handled Superman/DR Strange can be just as interesting as Mike Hammer or any Bruce Willis charatcer, its all in how the story is done and how annoying the characters are.

When it comes to complicated fiction IE fantasy or sci fi things can become either to silly or to complicated turning some off, I prefer it to mundane settings but that dose not mean I can not enjoy them.

Film can be pretty simplistic in its interpretations of persons,places or things, Action movies in particular can be grating in their retardation generally because they are made to bring in the most viewership.

Comic films tend to suck because everything great about the fiction is changed to suit the new interpretation rather than applying the "interpretation"(IE updating for the times) to the fiction.

In other words they should not try so hard to change the fiction its mostly undeeded and unwanted and marvel has at least been trying not to change the fiction so harshly in its last batch of films tho FF:SS/Emo spidy 3/Xmen 3 were....grating but the Xmen films are based off the Ultimate spin off so it was heavily comic based...just not the good comic..... Iron man and I hulk were solid,Punisher/Ghost Ridr were cheap.... Wolverine suffers from the taint of the writers strike plus I can't make up my mind if its more ultimate or not...probably is...

I like Spider man 1 2 felt rushed,Even batman 3 with Val kilmer was half decent Beginnings was a bit better if not slow paced despite how it was done Xmen 1 was decent, but Hulk,batman 4(BM and robin) and catwoman were horrid,Fantastic four flat(is it so hard to write a businessman having a secret life as a high tech arms maker who owns a small country....) don;t even get me started on the first punisher film or the mask sequel I mean time after time they churn out crap though I guess its a a high average since they are action movies..I did like judge dread for some strange reason... Superman is so so always treated as "Superman" I liked return er...I didn't hate it...but I would really like to see either or a more grounded Superman being forced to deal with his darker side or a superman that's just barely invincible not the I can fly in space and breath under water god moder..... not to mention throw Dark Side at him and not some lex luther knock off from space with that lovely vampire look hollywood can not get enough of........ or toss Lobo at him then have him and Lobo fight dark side I dunno.... anything is better than the Superman in a world full of humans....

ok I stop now or my rants will never end ><

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Every fictional character and universe has ongoing stories, arcs and characterisations, personalities and important hitorical events that set the stage for the present conflict and so on. The reason some fans can get apoplectic from a different version of the character or story is just that...it's different. It's not the Wolverine they knew from the comic book, not the Anakin Skywalker they imagined or the way Gandalf became Gandalf the White, or whatever.

The thing with comic books is that at any given time, there may well be several different versions of the same character in circulation at a given time (Spiderman [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_versions_of_Spider-Man] alone had The Amazing, Spectacular, Ultimate and so on). Different storytellers and artists envision the same characters in different ways, sometimes the same character can be quite different between incarnations except for the telltale, unique characteristics....eg. Wolverine's claws and his broody, loner nature, etc). The thing is comics have the advantage of being able to tell and retell a story many times over many months or years whilst a movie costs several 10s of millions to make and only has 2 hours to tell it in.

I think Star Trek fans are probably the worst for thi kind of thing...picking apart every detail and inconsistency in continuity, character and technology beyond most other 'hardcore' fans. In the end, there will always be differences between the book, the comic book and the movie, it's just the nature of the different mediums. Some people like one imagining of their beloved character more than another...I personally enjoyed the LotR movies a lot more than the books, great though they were. That's preference and my opinion as a fan, others will disagree, does it matter?

 

[scotth266]

Most fans don't want the characters and story destroyed or dumbed down so a bunch of idiots with snotty-nosed six year olds can enjoy it while their kids wail like banshees.

..I am kind of irritable tonight...

Understandable, and yes, that is exactly the issue.

The only reason that the movie exceeds some people's expectations is that their expectations were VERY low to begin with.

And we also accept certain movies: the Spider-Man trilogy, Iron Man, and the Dark Knight are all loved by comic-book fans. It's just that we hate certain, simple things being mangled.

For instance, I actually LIKED X-Men 3, but the movie suffers thanks to the silly pheonix sub-plot. If they had scrapped that in favor of something better, that movie could've rocked.

 

[Da_Schwartz]

Because some people just simply don't understand the impossibility of merging hundreds and thousands of monthly written comic storylines into a 2 hour movie. It is impossible. Even flims based on books such as twilight harry potter interview with a vamp for example. Are butchered for this same reason. If your a fan of the comics then appreciate the comics. Don't expect your fanboyish dream story to be fulfilled in a matter of hours. The only addaptation that did well in overall story telling and stayed as true as possible was lord of the rings. And that took what 10 hours between three films. And theres still another two in the works. As grand and massive as the books were its still nothing comapared to every comic appearance and moment that makes a character such as wolverine special. It simply cant be done.

 

[Grimm91]

Simple, they worship those characters. If any little facet about them is wrong they flip. This is the risk in making comics into movies, if you do it you must do it exactly right or you lose your intended target audience.

 

[Nickflip]

Hey, you'd be angry if they fucked with YOUR childhood too.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

I think super heroes are totally gay. Because they have super powers. Lame.

Hence "super." That's kinda the point.

But not Conan the Barbarian, and he's from Marvel. I love Conan the Barbarian because he has no powers whatsoever, and neither do most of the people he meets.

Instead, he runs into gods, the children of gods, gigantic animals, and other such beings that all might as well have superpowers considering their nature.

And all he does every comic is drink, have sex and kill people.

Wow. That sounds enthralling. No "story" to get in the way of any of that gratuitous violence and sex.

I read a Conan-Wolverine crossover comic, though, and they treated Conan like a primitive retard

As opposed to the stone-age brain surgeon that he is. Then again, you stated that all he does is eat, drink, and have sex, so why would Marvel treat him any differently than the barbarian that he's given the title of?

and of course Conan and Wolverine had to fight as soon as they met, as does everyone in a crossover. It's not like the characters involved in the crossover fight every random stranger they meet when they're NOT in a crossover.

Possibly because they're both violent sociopaths. Wolverine has the patience of a Chinese zookeeper watching the last male panda on earth, and Conan is a (wait for it) barbarian who solves his problems by killing them.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

They're fanboys of course. They are banal about pretty much everything.

This is the funniest typo I've seen all day. Accidental kudos!

Banal? I purposely put that.

Beats me what you think banal means. To my knowledge it's a synonym for 'trite,' which doesn't fit with what you said at all.