Originally Posted by Dr Tactics
Because they are different in tone. Tone makes the difference between a GN and a CB. That IMO is just ignorance about the genre as a whole, though I do understand their confusion in that you can buy a GN in a CB store..
So to you...tone makes the difference between a comic book movie and a movie based upon a comic book character?
Adam West's BATMAN and Bale's TDKR are both based on the comic book character BATMAN. The first is campy humor...the latter is as serious as serious can be. To me....they are both comic book movies. I see them as different variations of a common beginning. I have no problem with liking and appreciating a comic book movie. I have a feeling that many want to call them something else to remove the stigma of "comic book" from them. I embrace it.
An analogy - I became a STAR TREK fan in the 60's from the beginning. The people who became TREK fans started calling themselves Trekkies. As time went by....the non TREK fans started using the term Trekkies as an insult. So the serious TREK fans started calling themselves Trekkers. It separated them from the perceived onus of being something bad. When I was asked if I was a "Trekkie" or a "Trekker"....I answered "Yes." They would look confused and say "You have to make a choice." And I would tell them "I have. I choose to be a STAR TREK fan. And no matter what you call me, I will always be a proud STAR TREK fan."
I feel that some people are afraid that they will be called a comic book fan. I have no problem with being called that.
And just to clarify....I said that I feel that this is the case with some people...that does not mean I am saying it is the case for you or anybody in particular.