Comic/videogames based movies

[Luis]

DANG! I didn't know that XD

A movie was also made for this book I've told you I was reading before starting The Da Vinci Code, and... I took the tape out when I had seen no more than 20 minutes of it!! The book's the best ever for me. The main point of the plot is the searching of a guy, so you spend the whole book looking for Albert Dalmau, which you find at the end of the book (it's in Spanish, so I trust anyone of you were gonna read it XD ). In the movie, the first person you met is called Albert Dalmau!!!! And you're gonna look for a woman the whole movie!! WTF??? THAT'S NOT NEEDED!! IF YOU'RE GONNA MAKE A MOVIE, PLEASE BE PROFESSIONAL!! IF MEL GIBSON WANTED THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST TO BE IN ARAMAIC LANGUAGE(WHICH WAS NOT RLY NEEDED, BUT THAT GAVE IT A HIGHER 'TOUCH' OF REALISM) WHY DO YOU DIRECTORS CHANGE THINGS WHICH ARE REALLY IMPORTANT???

I really got mad when I saw that ****.

The good point of watching a comic/videogame based movie, is that you expect to see a faithfull spin-off, or representation of the game/comic. It's like if I did a Spiderman movie, in which Spiderman costume was all blue!! 'Oh c'mon! What's wrong? Things don't have to hold all the true!' ...

The more faithfull it is, the more professionalism the director/producer show.

 

[ShadowHeart]

All I'm saying is, with that attitude, you'll always be disappointed. Always. I'm not saying that directors shouldn't be faithful. It is generally the best if they are, but not always. Some things just have to be left out for example, you have to draw the line somewhere.

Why do people make movies? For fun? Perhaps, but the ultimate goal is to make money. If you don't, you're out of business pretty fast. How do you make money? By making a movie that the large masses will appreciate. If it comes at the cost of changing a couple of things from the original it is based on, for example to make it easier to follow without massive background information, it will be done. In the best of worlds, things wouldn't need to be changed, but that is rarely the case. Would you have watched a LOTR movie (or set of movies) with hours of pure introduction of hobbit culture and other things, and a total length of 20+ hours (perhaps far more)? That's just an example. The Amazing Spider-Man comic have seen how many years of magazines by now? If the Spiderman movies were completely faithful, they would have included a long time of highschooling, a failed attempt at joining Fantastic 4, Peter having several girlfriends before even meeting Mary Jane (such as Gwen Stacey who is killed by the Green Goblin), and several other events that I can't remember. Possible? I think not. To properly screen a massive comic such as Spiderman it would require a TV series, but TV series have massively smaller budgets (per hour anyway!) and you'd have far more to complain about such as crappy actors, clothes/suits and effects

Perhaps it is better if books, comics and videogames are never screened?

Sorry if I sound so negative..

 

[Luis]

All I'm saying is, with that attitude, you'll always be disappointed. Always. I'm not saying that directors shouldn't be faithful. It is generally the best if they are, but not always. Some things just have to be left out for example, you have to draw the line somewhere.

Why do people make movies? For fun? Perhaps, but the ultimate goal is to make money. If you don't, you're out of business pretty fast. How do you make money? By making a movie that the large masses will appreciate. If it comes at the cost of changing a couple of things from the original it is based on, for example to make it easier to follow without massive background information, it will be done. In the best of worlds, things wouldn't need to be changed, but that is rarely the case. Would you have watched a LOTR movie (or set of movies) with hours of pure introduction of hobbit culture and other things, and a total length of 20+ hours (perhaps far more)? That's just an example. The Amazing Spider-Man comic have seen how many years of magazines by now? If the Spiderman movies were completely faithful, they would have included a long time of highschooling, a failed attempt at joining Fantastic 4, Peter having several girlfriends before even meeting Mary Jane (such as Gwen Stacey who is killed by the Green Goblin), and several other events that I can't remember. Possible? I think not. To properly screen a massive comic such as Spiderman it would require a TV series, but TV series have massively smaller budgets (per hour anyway!) and you'd have far more to complain about such as crappy actors, clothes/suits and effects

Perhaps it is better if books, comics and videogames are never screened?

Sorry if I sound so negative..

Absolutelly right. XD

But by the other hand, that's the risk of doing a comic/videogame based movie.

Also, If they don't keep it faithfull, the 'fans' or the ones who loved most the comics/games could be really really disapointed, and for that make a negative buzz marketing. (Which means, talking bad about the movie to other potential members of the audience)

But Shadow, you should know that I'm a member of the audience... thus I must say which things do I like or which ones I don't. It's my duty XD
I know the whole story can't be screened. In the Spider-Man case, I don't care from which point do they start, but please keep it real! XD lol
I actually thing that Dr.Octopus, as well as Green Goblin are important villain ones...
I know they may do it for cash purposes, but hey! are you sure that skiping some important characteristics would be more profitable than makin' it just as the series have done it?
I mean, Spiderman is a very well known hero... the series deserved his fame. Why try to change elements that brought the original one to the fame?

Just think about it.
Anyway, it's quite obvious there're two different kind of opinions here XD
Which is very good!

 

[ShadowHeart]

I'm sure the directors had a reason for every single thing they did. We just don't know what. Some may be better than you think Not saying that I know anything, but think about it. Also, if you were to screen Spiderman, what would you have left out? 2 hours is only so much.

The only thing I was really disappointed with in the Spiderman movies was the spider sense. It's not even mentioned, is it? I can't recall that anyway. It is very very apparent in both the comic and the cartoon, but virtually nonexistant in the movies. It would have been interesting for example to show in the 3rd movie how Venom is immune to it (that is providing Venom is even in it, we only know that the suit is, right?) and how that would affect battles.

And for the record.. Yes, I agree the taking off the mask thing was a little stupid, there's no real motivation for it (other than building up for the scene inside the train where the people show how much they care for Spiderman I guess). I'm talking overall though, you seem negative about every single change by default

 

[Hydra]

'Kay.

If they screw up the Silver Surfer/Fantastic Four tie in thing, I'll lose hope in anything comic/video game based spinoffs. Of movies.

Silver Surfer is one of my favorite Marvel characters. XD He's basically above gods. Well, if they base it off of when he turned into the Silver Surfer, then s'okay if he gets beaten by the Fantastic Four.

Otherwise, I'll be waiting for Galactus to rear his head, while I scream in fear, and delight when I *insert pants joke here* myself when I see it.

That's all for me.

;not