A Comic Book Movie is SUPPOSED to be "fun" . . . isn't it?

[Willie Lumpkin]

I would like to get some honest opinion and thought here. Maybe I'm alone, and if so, hey, that's fine, but I'd like to see what the rest of you think.

I was watching Superman Returns last night, and as I watched the dreary introspection, I thought to myself: "If I had picked up a comic book like this when I was 8 years old, I never would have bought another one."

. . . And I think that's a big problem with Comic Book films. Superman Returns, Hulk, Spider-Man 3 . . . do any of those films really capture the feeling you had when you were 8 years old and you had just picked up a copy of your favorite mag and sat down with a coke to read it cover to cover?

Speaking for myself, as a 42 year old man, I didn't walk into a comic-book store last year and realize that these things were wonderfully written and great literature. I read them when I was 8 years old because they were fun, and now I'm looking forward to a movie that will help to recapture some of those images and some of my memories of simpler times. I don't want to learn something about myself or contemplate man's inhumanity to man.

Do we even have a right to try to hijack these things away from the kids? Isn't that sort of selfish?

Now that some people have seen the film, we are hearing that it is a "fun popcorn flik" and many of us (admitedly myself included) have been disappointed to hear that. But I'm starting to think that maybe Tim Story is the only contemporary director who gets it (I know some people will be up in arms over that statement).

Seriously, when it comes to a film like this, whose opinion is more valid: A film critic or an 8 year old kid?

The film critic may be able to comment on the quality of the film, but only the 8 year old kid will be able to tell us if the movie does what comic books have been doing for the past 70 years.

Watch Stan Lee introducing a Fantastic Four cartoon some time and tell me who he thinks his audience is.

When we demand an adult movie, are we like an adult walking into a kid's room and taking all his toys? Don't these movies really belong to the kids?

People were upset that this movie might be rated PG instead of PG-13. Shouldn't it be G?

When I was a kid, all Marvel comic books had a stamp from the "Comics Code Authority" which was the comic book equivalent of a G rating.

The members of this board have always been rabid about "staying faithful to the source material". Shouldn't that go beyond simply making characters costumes look right and also include the tone of the film?

 

[Dragon]

Come on. It's just time to stop making excuses for this franchise. Do we really need to go over the idea that a movie can be fun without being silly and mindless- a movie can have comedy without being tantamount to a sitcom and beings of extraordinary appearance and power will not be laughed at or misunderstood by the mysterious non-comic reading audience if executed with care.

Stan Lee prided himself and his company's work as not being geared only toward children. Children could read them of course, but the stories weren't childish in scope. Malus has posted the Galactus trilogy and several other FF stories in the countdown thread. Read them. Those stories capture the tone of the FF. They lean no more toward comedy than any other title that Stan Lee oversaw. The man enjoyed comic relief and injected it into every Marvel book. But he also wanted the stories to be dramatic. Heart-wrenching even. To look at his work makes it obvious that Fox and their crew haven't captured the vision of these comics or the heart of the FF. And it isn't about money. LOTR films cost less than 100 million each. The last three Star Wars cost under 120 million each.

The material is there to make 10 great, epic FF films. It's just that no one gives a damn. It started with Arad considering this a "superhero sitcom" and despite all of his attempts at damage control (And as we see with Galactus, LIE), this is what they made. Arad is a big part of the reason the Marvel films have failed. He doesn't get the characters and is little more than a snake-oil salesman. More of the films he's been involved with have failed than succeeded. His interference is a big reason why Spidey 3 was less a triumph than 2. I might be inclined to be happy that he's gone from Marvel. But his absence doesn't mean the next guy will be any better. If Stan weren't too old and tired, I'd wish he was actually given a hand in the process. Approving scripts and so forth. But then, If he can do it for Disney, he can do it for his earlier creations.

The FF filmicly are ruined for me. I hope it ends here so Marvel can get back the rights and try again as with the Hulk. But i don't even care if they make a third film, and I sure as hell won't be wasting time following its development.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

The fact is that you can do a fun superhero movie without being stupid.
The Incredibles is a masterpiece as the action was great, fast without being confusing, while still having a lot of good character moments.
Here's there's a too conscious attempt to make a commercially successful movie to try to make something that has a minimum of artistic value.
So you need to put a Chris Evans naked scene for the female teenagers, a naked Jessica for the male ones, the hip music, you have to make it more reality based than the books for not risking of alienating the average viewer, the product placement ad so on.
At Fox they're forgetting that their biggest franchise ever is one that completely renounced to realism to mix fantasy and science fiction with a great amount of things from the Kirby comics.
Think of Star Wars done under Tom Rothman. "Does this Darth Vader have to wear the helmet all the time?", "A green dwarf puppet as a mentor? Can we have Jessica Simpson instead?" or "Can we put a Coke billboard somewhere on Tatooine?". I still hope that once they've established a strong fan base for the franchise with this movie, that they'll understand they can avoid sticking to the commercial formula, that they can try to be epic and funny and faithful to the imaginative work of Lee and Kirby at the same time and still win at the boxoffice.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

The fact is that you can do a fun superhero movie without being stupid.
The Incredibles is a masterpiece as the action was great, fast without being confusing, while still having a lot of good character moments.

The incredibles was the example I had in mind. That was probably a better comic-book movie than any films we've had based on actual comic books.

It captured the feel of what comic books try to do much more than the moping stuff we've been fed over the past 10 years and told were based on comic books.

Star wars is another good example of capturing the feel of a comic book.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Come on. It's just time to stop making excuses for this franchise. Do we really need to go over the idea that a movie can be fun without being silly and mindless- a movie can have comedy without being tantamount to a sitcom and beings of extraordinary appearance and power will not be laughed at or misunderstood by the mysterious non-comic reading audience if executed with care.

Stan Lee prided himself and his company's work as not being geared only toward children. Children could read them of course, but the stories weren't childish in scope. Malus has posted the Galactus trilogy and several other FF stories in the countdown thread. Read them. Those stories capture the tone of the FF. They lean no more toward comedy than any other title that Stan Lee oversaw. The man enjoyed comic relief and injected it into every Marvel book. But he also wanted the stories to be dramatic. Heart-wrenching even. To look at his work makes it obvious that Fox and their crew haven't captured the vision of these comics or the heart of the FF. And it isn't about money. LOTR films cost less than 100 million each. The last three Star Wars cost under 120 million each.

The material is there to make 10 great, epic FF films. It's just that no one gives a damn. It started with Arad considering this a "superhero sitcom" and despite all of his attempts at damage control (And as we see with Galactus, LIE), this is what they made. Arad is a big part of the reason the Marvel films have failed. He doesn't get the characters and is little more than a snake-oil salesman. More of the films he's been involved with have failed than succeeded. His interference is a big reason why Spidey 3 was less a triumph than 2. I might be inclined to be happy that he's gone from Marvel. But his absence doesn't mean the next guy will be any better. If Stan weren't too old and tired, I'd wish he was actually given a hand in the process. Approving scripts and so forth. But then, If he can do it for Disney, he can do it for his earlier creations.

The FF filmicly are ruined for me. I hope it ends here so Marvel can get back the rights and try again as with the Hulk. But i don't even care if they make a third film, and I sure as hell won't be wasting time following its development.

 

[Dragon]

Another thing is that if you really look at it, this whole "non-comic audience" and what they'll accept thing is a myth. If anything it's the total opposite. Non-fans go into these films with a clean slate. They're willing to accept whatever you present to them. If the filmmakers and actors take it seriously, the audience will. There are simply too many films- the main example being Star Wars- with far out, weird, goofy characters that the non-fan audiences plugged into without a peep. It's really the FAN audience who gripes and laughs and nitpicks characters.

 

[Iceman]

A comic book is a medium in the same way that books and films are. There's no need to stipulate that they should be all about the "fun" any more than all books and films should be. Different comic books and their relevant CBMs can go for different approaches. When I see Batman I want to see lots of dark & not too much fun. When I see Spidey I want things to be more balanced.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

People, I'm well aware that the majority on this board are comic fans primarily and understand less about movies. But you have to understand the way (conventional Western) movies are supposed to work; the pleasure is derived from a successfully executed narrative, not a collection of fun momments for it's own sake. Let's take Terminator 2, or The Matrix; are these movies simple fun? Or are they superbly executed works that tell gripping stories?

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

In 1971, 40 year old men did not read comic books. I know. I was there.

That may not be true anymore, but it was when Stan Lee was writing FF.

In 1971, it was a scientifically proven fact that comic books would "rot your brain". I know that because many adults told me that and in 1971 adults knew everything (something has changed in the universe and now 14 year olds know everything).

When we get a comic-book film and the reviewers say: "Don't see this film, it will rot your brain!" someone will have finally gotten it right.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

People, I'm well aware that the majority on this board are comic fans primarily and understand less about movies. But you have to understand the way (conventional Western) movies are supposed to work; the pleasure is derived from a successfully executed narrative, not a collection of fun moments for it's own sake. Let's take Terminator 2, or The Matrix; are these movies simple fun? Or are they superbly executed works that tell gripping stories?

The fact is that many comic-book stories have stories more coherent, balanced and gripping than their movie adaptations.
Compare Miller's Daredevil stories with the movie, or the F4 sequel to the Galactus saga by Lee and Kirby. Movies are widely considered to be a more sophisticated art form than comic-books, but comic-book movies sometimes ends up being the ******ed child of both.

 

[Dragon]

In 1971, 40 year old men did not read comic books. I know. I was there.
That may not be true anymore, but it was when Stan Lee was writing FF.

Yes they did. I know of several of my uncles who read comics back then. And every age in between, including my then 20 year old brother who got me into reading comics. If anything, i knew more guys of college age who read comics then kids my own age. Who do you think Stan was lecturing to on those college campuses? Adults were reading comics since the 30's. Stan and Marvel just made it less embarrassing.

In 1971, it was a scientifically proven fact that comic books would "rot your brain". I know that because many adults told me that and in 1971 adults knew everything (something has changed in the universe and now 14 year olds know everything).

When we get a comic-book film and the reviewers say: "Don't see this film, it will rot your brain!" someone will have finally gotten it right.

What? Marvel comics at that time was seen as raising the level of comic books. Anyone who knows anything about Stan Lee knows what was going on that that point. You think 10 year olds were the ones buying Spidey's drug issues from that year? College students and radio DJs were discussing events and philosophical points raised in the Silver Surfer's first series. Time Magazine was discussing the impact of Marvel on American culture (This wouldn't have happened if adults weren't reading the comics).

And now, more than ever, sdults, not children are comic book fans. I rarely if ever see a child in a comic shop. Making FF movies for children was childish.

 

[Dragon]

People, I'm well aware that the majority on this board are comic fans primarily and understand less about movies. But you have to understand the way (conventional Western) movies are supposed to work; the pleasure is derived from a successfully executed narrative, not a collection of fun momments for it's own sake. Let's take Terminator 2, or The Matrix; are these movies simple fun? Or are they superbly executed works that tell gripping stories?

And the thing is- if these guys were dumping the source material to take the stories up a notch, I could somewhat see the point. But dumbing the material down is just a waste.

 

[The Master]

In 1971, it was a scientifically proven fact that comic books would "rot your brain". I know that because many adults told me that and in 1971 adults knew everything (something has changed in the universe and now 14 year olds know everything).

When we get a comic-book film and the reviewers say: "Don't see this film, it will rot your brain!" someone will have finally gotten it right.

The same thing could be said about video games, and yet you have the military using video game-based simulators as a method of firearms and flight training.

 

[Obi-Ron]

Making FF movies for children was childish.

You can't possibly think they should've have made an R-rated FF movie?

 

[Kelly]

My goal is to have a fun time with my family and friends at the movies June 15th. I will walk into this movie as I do all other movies, not worrying about BO, not worrying about what others on this site think about it, not worrying about what the critics think. I didn't do that with FF 2005, but that is what I'm going to do this time. I'm going in as I do all movies with my family. When I walk out, who knows how I'll feel, but I'm not going to predict that at this point. In answer to your question, yes I believe comicbook movies are meant to be fun.

I did not go into "Crash" thinking it would be fun, but I also did not go see the movie with the youngsters in my family.



As far as Superman Returns.......I loved that movie.....lol I was in the theatre with ages ranging from 5 to early 50's.....and not one person had a bad thing to say about it, it was an enjoyable time at the movies.

And hey Dragon, how about allowing people to have a positive outlook without calling it an excuse for the franchise. I know you are getting annoyed with that statement, but the annoyance goes both ways.

 

[MOIDANGEREUX]

I would like to get some honest opinion and thought here. Maybe I'm alone, and if so, hey, that's fine, but I'd like to see what the rest of you think.

I was watching Superman Returns last night, and as I watched the dreary introspection, I thought to myself: "If I had picked up a comic book like this when I was 8 years old, I never would have bought another one."

. . . And I think that's a big problem with Comic Book films. Superman Returns, Hulk, Spider-Man 3 . . . do any of those films really capture the feeling you had when you were 8 years old and you had just picked up a copy of your favorite mag and sat down with a coke to read it cover to cover?

Speaking for myself, as a 42 year old man, I didn't walk into a comic-book store last year and realize that these things were wonderfully written and great literature. I read them when I was 8 years old because they were fun, and now I'm looking forward to a movie that will help to recapture some of those images and some of my memories of simpler times. I don't want to learn something about myself or contemplate man's inhumanity to man.

Do we even have a right to try to hijack these things away from the kids? Isn't that sort of selfish?

Now that some people have seen the film, we are hearing that it is a "fun popcorn flik" and many of us (admitedly myself included) have been disappointed to hear that. But I'm starting to think that maybe Tim Story is the only contemporary director who gets it (I know some people will be up in arms over that statement).

Seriously, when it comes to a film like this, whose opinion is more valid: A film critic or an 8 year old kid?

The film critic may be able to comment on the quality of the film, but only the 8 year old kid will be able to tell us if the movie does what comic books have been doing for the past 70 years.

Watch Stan Lee introducing a Fantastic Four cartoon some time and tell me who he thinks his audience is.

When we demand an adult movie, are we like an adult walking into a kid's room and taking all his toys? Don't these movies really belong to the kids?

People were upset that this movie might be rated PG instead of PG-13. Shouldn't it be G?

When I was a kid, all Marvel comic books had a stamp from the "Comics Code Authority" which was the comic book equivalent of a G rating.

The members of this board have always been rabid about "staying faithful to the source material". Shouldn't that go beyond simply making characters costumes look right and also include the tone of the film?

MY GOD I COULDN'T AGREE MORE!!!

 

[The Kid]

Fun definitely is what comic book flicks should be for. but let's not go batman and robin on all of them.

What's fun to me is giving a hoot about a character... I've yet to give a hoot about any of tim story's characters beyond a superficial interest in alba's booty.

 

[Malus]

Stan Lee prided himself and his company's work as not being geared only toward children. Children could read them of course, but the stories weren't childish in scope.

True. I think the key phrase there as it relates to superhero movies is "children could read them of course."
All the fuss over the PG rating this week really ticked me off. Stan & jack would never have wanted to see their work turned into movies containing fart jokes and curses. When Ben Grimm barked "Give me the Godd*mn mirror" in FF1, I have no doubt Jack Kirby would have cringed.

Malus has posted the Galactus trilogy and several other FF stories in the countdown thread. Read them. Those stories capture the tone of the FF.

Right you are there.
And I'll take this opportunity to provide a link to the individual chapters so folks won't have to wade through that enormous thread. Bear in mind that you'll have to scroll down just a bit to find the beginnings of parts one and two:

Part One covers FF #48 from december, 1965:
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=254833&page=80
Part Two covers FF #49 from January, 1966:
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=254833&page=82
Part Three covers FF #50 from February, 1966:
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=254833&page=85

And now, more than ever, adults, not children are comic book fans. I rarely if ever see a child in a comic shop..

True again. I think this is a tragedy though. And if the situation isn't rectified soon, the day is coming when there will be no comics because there will be no customers. If we can't get kids reading comics again, where will adult comics consumers come from? I know very few adult comics readers who didn't start reading comics as kids.

 

[terry78]

You never see kids in comic shops anymore because all the comics have become adult fare. Some are still fun and clever but most are basically hard PG-13 or R rated at this point, with most of the appeal coming from blood and T&A. I like to read them, but I miss the fantastic elements of the older Kirby stories. If Peyton Reed had gotten this gig, he was going to place them in a 1960's setting, so I doubt it would've had reason to be anything more than PG then. This movie is capturing that 1960's vibe in a 2007 setting for the most part, and my dad is one guy that's already hopping around excited for it because of Silver Surfer, and he's a 60 year old guy that's collected these things for years...and my ass will be right there with him in the theatre.

 

[MOIDANGEREUX]

True again. I think this is a tragedy though. And if the situation isn't rectified soon, the day is coming when there will be no comics because there will be no customers. If we can't get kids reading comics again, where will adult comics consumers come from? I know very few adult comics readers who didn't start reading comics as kids.

The owner of the comic book store I go to regularly expresses how sad he feels about this.

 

[Kelly]

True again. I think this is a tragedy though. And if the situation isn't rectified soon, the day is coming when there will be no comics because there will be no customers. If we can't get kids reading comics again, where will adult comics consumers come from? I know very few adult comics readers who didn't start reading comics as kids.

The owner of the comic book store I go to regularly expresses how sad he feels about this.

Same thing here....I go to 2 different comic book stores, one is a franchise, the other a family owned small comic book shop.

The larger one I go to is frequented by older teens, and adults.....they do not carry large supplies of much other than grahic novels, and the ultimate versions of the comics. You have to go early to get anything FF because they only stock a few copies, and those are bought fairly quickly. Not sure why this is, but thats how it is.

The owner of the smaller CB store stocks comicbooks, but mostly Ultimates, he's not big on the grahic novels, but stocks them to stay in business.....I've asked him before why he doesn't stock much as far as the FF, he says because the only version that really sells anymore is the UFF....which he stocks quite a bit, and he has made the comment about how the demograhics for comics have changed in the past decade and a half...........he says that his business is not as enjoyable to him as it once was, and he's looking at selling it.......he misses the kids, and their excitement when a new comic book comes out. He said that the kids don't like the UFF that much, its not written for them in mind, its written for teenagers in mind.....the teenagers read them, but don't necessarily advertise it......if that makes sense......he stocks a few of each of the reg issues primarily for collectors. Kids nowadays are waiting for the TPB's.....

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Yes they did. I know of several of my uncles who read comics back then. And every age in between, including my then 20 year old brother who got me into reading comics. If anything, i knew more guys of college age who read comics then kids my own age.

That's anecdotal at best.

Who do you think Stan was lecturing to on those college campuses?

. . . Time Magazine was discussing the impact of Marvel on American culture (This wouldn't have happened if adults weren't reading the comics).

Do you suppose Dr. Seuss ever had invitations to speak on college campuses or ever had magazine articles written about him? Does that mean he was actually writing his books for adults?

You think 10 year olds were the ones buying Spidey's drug issues from that year?

Wasn't that the idea? Didn't the health department want to keep kids off drugs so they asked Stan Lee to do a comic book showing kids how bad drugs were (since kids read comic books)?


And were Spidey's Electric Company appearances also aimed at adults?

Look, I don't know if you even believe what you are trying to argue, but the simple fact is that in the late 60's and early 70's the primary readers of comic books were 7-14 year old boys. Did some adults read them? Sure. Did some girls read them? Sure. But Stan Lee knew who his customers were.

Did he talk down to them or write "kid's stuff"? Of course not. There's nothing a 14 year old boy likes less than being treated like a "kid".

Stan Lee took classic elements of internal and external conflict from history, literature and mythology and wove them into simple, FUN stories with a lot of style.

Making complex literary elements simple and accessible was one of his great talents.



So do you really believe adults were reading comic books in large numbers in the early '70s, or are you just arguing for the fun of it? I did a quick google search for historical comic book demgraphics, but I couldn't find anything relevant.

Here's my offer to you. If you can track down any valid data that shows that more than 30% of comic books in 1971 were bought and read by people older than 20, not only will I be amazed, but I will admit you were right and I was wrong AND I will donate $100 to the charity of your choice. How's that sound?

Stan Lee knew who his customers were. I know who his customers were, and I suspect you do to.

 

[Kelly]

I believe, that the comic industry (In the US) is missing a huge demographic. Teenage girls. Japan has hit that demograic solidly, and they have good comic book sales in Japan. They've grown with the times.

 

[terry78]

^You go to any bookstore here in the country, hit the manga section. That's nothing but females reading through them and browsing, with the random dude.

 

[Dragon]

You can't possibly think they should've have made an R-rated FF movie?

Were the comics R-rated? There's a medium.