Characters who (I feel) were improved upon by the movies

[Chris Wallace]

1.Toad.

I think most of us can agree that he was a pathetic joke without a punch line before. Nothing about him made much of an impression; he was a throwaway villain, unworthy of even a cameo in a video game. Here for the first time we saw Toad as a dangerous, meaningful addition to Magneto's army.
2.Blade.

I don't think very many fans know this, but the whole "Daywalker" aspect was an invention of Hollywood. Originally, Blade derived no benefit from the vampire bite that killed his mother save an immunity to vampirism (meaning he couldn't be turned by a bite) and resistance to hypnosis. He carried wooden knives and sometimes a wooden sword, and had no other powers. Nobody cared about him and if not for the Hollywood version I doubt this would have ever changed. Marvel has tried and failed repeatedly to capture some of the Hollywood magic on the page.
3. Venom.

I know most of you won't agree with me on this one. But I do prefer the movie version here for a few reasons. First, not making Brock a bodybuilder kind of helped us see him as a dark reflection of Peter Parker, which supports the idea of Venom as a dark Spider-Man. Not making his look essentially identical to Spider-Man's was definitely an improvement, and making him genuinely bad instead of the misguided delusional "hero" complex that NOBODY seemed to know how to handle, just made for better storytelling. I think some of the worst Spider-Man stories ever written have been spawned by the creation of Venom. Here he was just a bad guy drunk with power, which made a lot more sense.
4. Ben Parker.

In this case, it's simply because here we got to know Uncle Ben a little bit. He wasn't just some throwaway character but an integral part of the story. Here we were saddened by his death even when we knew it was going to happen.
5. Batman.

For many of us, our love affair with the Dark Knight began here. I credit this film moreso than Miller's graphic novel with restoring Batman to his former glory. This movie showed us a less happy-go-lucky Batman and eventually brought us the beloved animated series, which also had a hand in propelling Batman to the heights he has since achieved.
6. Iron Monger.

Did ANYBODY care about Stane 5 years ago? We couldn't have asked for a more worthy foe in Iron Man's debut.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Yeah Chris i agree with Toad, to an extent, powerwise and attitude wise he was a better villan. but they ended up doing something interesting with Toad in the books of the 70s, whereas in the movie he was pretty much a characterless action figure. In the Kirby/Lee books he was always sucking up to Magneto, being his 'toady' so to speak, always at his beck and call, not much going on there characterwise.
Then years later, when the X-Men were fighting the Avengers, Toad got sick of Magneto bossing him around with no respect and tried to kill him, almost succeeding. Toad also developed an unhealthy obsession with the Scarlet witch while she was in the Evil mutants, and later on attacked the Avengers using high technology( to impersonate the cosmic entity 'The Stranger') when Wanda married the Vision(who were on their Honeymoon when he attacked). So, they did end up doing some interesting character stories with him, expanding on the 'toad(y)' aspect of his character.
But, yeah, his power to bounce around was not that great on it's own, that's why they gave him all that tech when he attacked the Avengers.

Harry Osborne is a good one, his friendship with Pete in the movies felt more paltable than in the early books, and when he became the Goblin in the books he just became a crazy cackling copy of his father. whereas in the films , he retained the aspect of his own character that still had a personal relationship with Peter, except, y'know, he was v v pissed off at him now.
I know things were done with Harry in the nineties that made him more interesting as a character, and I do have *some* of those comics, in Spectacular Spider-man when he starts to go crazy again, culminating in his death. They did use that final death scene from SSM 200 in the SM3 take, which was good.
But, in terms of the original arc of friend to enemy, the movies did the character better.


Also...the big one.....The Joker. I prefer the movie version from TDK, he comes across as more intelligent and philosophical than the joker we got usually in the books. that aspect was taken from The killing Joke of course, but in the film, that side of the Joker's mind seemed to be in every scene he did, instead of just a guy who was blowing crap up for fun and/or money. I mean, in actual fact, the comics version of the Joker *did* do his crimes for money, as well as mayhem, but the movie version was all about the power to show his philosophy was true, and that to me was far more interesting.

I also agree about Venom, showing a weak, delusional man, who had no power over his fellow man before in his life(as opposed to bodybuilder cb VEddie), gave a far more chilling dimension to this pathetic soul who suddenly found himself with the superpowers he needed to further his quest for power over his peers.

From Kick-Ass:
(Big Daddy) millar tried to subvert the notion of the noble hero who had been wronged, seeking revenge, the Batman/Punisher archetype, but in doing so, it made the character much less sympathetic, when really we wanted to sympathiose with him, as he had dragged his kid into this too. At least in the movie you could say he was training her to survive in a world that had taken his wife, in the books it was just because he wanted her to have a noble career, but there are many noble careers that do not put your daughter in danger, so that did not cut much ice.

(Katie Melua) Kick-Ass's girlfriend(would-be in the book). In the book she is nothing more than a cipher, to reflect KA's journey, but in the movie she is changed completely and benefits the movie a great deal as a v caring, loveable, thoughtful, intelligent person, who gives KA a reason to live apart from his sh dreams.

(Kick-Ass) He seems a little more likeable in the film, but, I don't know if that is due to the actor playing him, I liked him in the book too( I know you do not like this character Chris, lol), due to his tenacous attitude. But with things like lying to Katie about being gay and stuff, he seemed more sorry about that in the film, so showed deeper character traits.

Tony stark/Iron-Man: Ok, i only have a few books from the 1980s with Iron-Man, and the Spider-man and Civil war books he appeared in. But he was never, ever a frickin comedian like he was in these films. I guess that is down to RDJ being cast, I do not know the ultimate version of the character bar the animated movie adaptation and a brief cameo in Ultimate Hulk vs Wolverine, but he did not come off as a comic in those either.
And if you are going to have a womanising, drinking sh, it's way better to make him a fun one.

Johnny Storm: Was he *ever* a funny guy in the books? I have some of the Lee/Buscema run, a couple of Kirby's, some of the Byrne run, and a couple from the civil war period, but he was never a funny guy in those books. Just a guy who moaned about Crystal bugging off to the Great refuge, had a temper, moaned some more, and slagged off the Thing, which usually came off more mean than humourous banter. Chris Evans was by far the best thing about those films, the only watchable part of the 1st one.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I never read Kick-Ass & I hated the movie, so I can't comment on those. Evans portrayed the Johnny Storm I've always known, or at least the way I've always perceived him to be. Ditto for Downey's Stark.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Evans portrayed the Johnny Storm I've always known, or at least the way I've always perceived him to be. Ditto for Downey's Stark.

I only got the comedian vibe from johnny Storm when he was taking the piss out of the Thing, but in the movie he basically kids around in every scene, with every person he meets, so i thought that was different.
I probably have not read enough Iron-Man to know the character that well, but I never saw much joking from stark in the books I read, nothing more than normal anyway, but in the films he is a non-stop comedian basically, except of course when he has something serious to deal with.

 

[bored]

The super wise-ass take on Stark came more from the Ultimate version, I think.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

The super wise-ass take on Stark came more from the Ultimate version, I think.

Yeah, I thought it might have been that, I have not read the ultimate comics, but now I think more clearly on it, they did have that aspect in the animated adaptation.

 

[Gunga Diner]

Sandman
Venom
Joker
Uncle Ben
Everybody from Kick-Ass

 

[Chris Wallace]

Sandman
Venom
Joker
Uncle Ben
Everybody from Kick-Ass

Keep that up and I may have to friend you.

 

[Gunga Diner]

No anything but that.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Batman? Hell no.

In what ways did the movies improve Batman?

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

Good idea for a thread. Some people act like it's sacrilegious to even imply that some hack director could somehow improve upon the sacred text of the comics, but it's freakin' true sometimes.

I'll agree with "Everyone from Kick Ass" and I'll throw in Wesley from Wanted.

Apparently I like Mark Millar's concepts but hate his actual writing, because I was meh on Kick Ass the book but absolutely adored the movie, and I LOATHE Wanted the book but love the movie. Wesley (like pretty much everything in the book) was such an obnoxious character, not helped by his Eminem appearance. The only thing I did like was his mask and suit from the comics, kinda wish that would've been brought over to the film.

I can't say I agree with the following choices - Batman, Joker, or Venom. I've liked most of their cinematic interpretations (except maybe Clooney's Batman) but the comic (as a whole obviously, since there's thousands of examples) still trumps.

But I'll go with two heavy hitter villains that might be controversial - Penguin and Doc Ock.

I was never a huge Penguin fan, I think he's fun in small doses but I never bought him as a serious threat to Batman. Burgess Meredith was AWESOME and made the character really fun, and Danny DeVito, while a disgusting monster and a huge deviation from the comics, absolutely brought the character to a great and exciting place with humor and pathos.

Doc Ock always kind of annoyed me in the comics. He was just kind of the obnoxious chubby thorn in Spidey's side with the bad haircut, and I always sort of irrationally resented him for often stealing the "arch nemesis" spotlight from Green Goblin. And while I don't agree with making EVERY villain sympathetic, I thought Raimi's version worked incredibly well and Alfred Molina just KILLED IT. True, he kind of took Doc Connor's role, but oh well. He was just fantastic.

I'd also say Justin Hammer. I don't dislike Justin Hammer in the comics, but I just absolutely loved Sam Rockwell's version. Hysterical and totally fun to watch. I kind of wanted the whole movie to be about Hammer.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

True, he kind of took Doc Connor's role, but oh well. He was just fantastic.

In retrospect, it was good that he did, as Doc Conners became nothing more than a cool cameo character, so it was good to see that dynamic played out in the Raimi series.
I have to agree with what you said about Doc Ock being an improvement in that area, as the villan for the most part in the comics is a one note madman.

But, he kind of is like that in the books, it's just that it's not shown very much. in the Ditko/Lee origin issue, he is a normal scientist who then wakes up damaged , and insane as a result of his accident, so a similar thing is going on where he is not totally responsible for going bad.
There was also an issue of John Byrne's Fantastic Four, where Sue Storm is suffering from a radiation illness, and Reed knows that Octavious is the only expert in the field who has the know-how to save her. So, he goes to find Ock, who is in the middle of rehab in a mental hospital for crooks. He has been seperated from his Ockto arms, and is making progress in reverting back to the man he once was, a polite, caring scientist, which is how he is when talking to Reed.
But, in a funny development, when Reed is taking Ock to Sue's side at the hospital, Ock starts to see all the billboards Jameson has plastered about the city attacking Spider-man, his hatred for Spider-man surfaces in a big way, and he reverts back to type, mentally calling on his Ockto arms, which bust loose from their shackles, and re-join him. Good issue.

 

[henry_9305]

I agree with Blade, the movie improved his character alot.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I like Venom better when he has a personality (comics) not just some mindless hissing creature (movie).

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

I like Venom better when he has a personality (comics) not just some mindless hissing creature (movie).

Even though his full blown appearance is short, there is some good character moments with Venom at the end of SM3. When he has SM tied up on the web, and is sitting on his chest, and when he has him tied up. The whole speech about how he humiliated him, and the part about how he likes to be bad, because it makes him happy.

That all felt like a natural extension of the Eddie we got in the movie, if we had gotten a longer appearance with full on Venom we would have gotten more of that kind of thing. Myself and Chris were talking about the Brock character changes as a whole, just as folk take into consideration the pre-accident Doc Ock when they gauge his movie characterisation.

 

[PyroChamber]

2.Blade.

I don't think very many fans know this, but the whole "Daywalker" aspect was an invention of Hollywood. Originally, Blade derived no benefit from the vampire bite that killed his mother save an immunity to vampirism (meaning he couldn't be turned by a bite) and resistance to hypnosis. He carried wooden knives and sometimes a wooden sword, and had no other powers. Nobody cared about him and if not for the Hollywood version I doubt this would have ever changed. Marvel has tried and failed repeatedly to capture some of the Hollywood magic on the page.

Wasn't it the Spider-Man animated series that started it first? Because that was the first time I had even heard of Blade, I had thought he was just a character created for the cartoon at first.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Wasn't it the Spider-Man animated series that started it first? Because that was the first time I had even heard of Blade, I had thought he was just a character created for the cartoon at first.

Yeah, you're right. The character of 'Whistler' was created for the cartoon, and perhaps other aspects of Blade's powers. I don't recall if Blade had super-strength in the cartoons(unlike the books, as Chris says), but he may well have.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Negative @ Pyrochamber/bumwhowalks, it was actually the other way around. The makers of the Spidey cartoon learned the plans for the Blade movie (which was in development a lot longer than many fans realize) and incorporated it into the series because they liked it. Goyer invented those elements first.

 

[Brother Jack]

There are elements of Harvey Dent that I thought were bettered in TDK, namely making him out to be a blond-haired "white knight" of Gotham (daytime Batman, as it were). It makes his eventual turn to the dark side that much more detrimental, and sets him up as a mirror to Bruce, who is of course the brown-haired dark knight.

 

[Timstuff]

You guys have brought up some great examples (for the most part). Ima go with Doc Ock. Yeah, he was a cool villain in the comics, but he was just that-- a villain. Compare him to the movie version, and you see a much more complex and tormented character IMO. He is someone who overestimated his ability to control his inventions, whether it was his fusion reactor or his mechanical arms. He was a good mad who got ahead of himself, which we see in the moment that he says "the power of a sun in the palm of my hand." Right after that was when the machine started acting up, and instead of shutting it down and saving face for both himself and his sponsors, he lost everything. He became permanently fused to his mechanical arms, and he lost his wife. He would have committed suicide after that had the arms not gotten into his mind and convinced him to take back what he had lost, replacing his agony with anger. He was an anti-villain, and a well written anti-villain can actually be in many ways can be more fascinating than a regular villain or an anti-hero.

 

[Octoberist]

Burton's Batman, afterall, did create the 'grappling gun' inwhich became a mainstay in the comics later. (Before, Batman was seen with a Batarang attach to a piece of rope). So I'd say it did help improve Batman on a superficial level.

 

[Octoberist]

Wasn't it the Spider-Man animated series that started it first? Because that was the first time I had even heard of Blade, I had thought he was just a character created for the cartoon at first.

At the time Goyer finished the Blade script, he showed it to Marvel and they loved him so much that they added that version of the character to the Spider-Man cartoon back in 94. Then 'Blade' the movie finally got released in 97.

 

[Chris Wallace]

You guys have brought up some great examples (for the most part). Ima go with Doc Ock. Yeah, he was a cool villain in the comics, but he was just that-- a villain. Compare him to the movie version, and you see a much more complex and tormented character IMO. He is someone who overestimated his ability to control his inventions, whether it was his fusion reactor or his mechanical arms. He was a good mad who got ahead of himself, which we see in the moment that he says "the power of a sun in the palm of my hand." Right after that was when the machine started acting up, and instead of shutting it down and saving face for both himself and his sponsors, he lost everything. He became permanently fused to his mechanical arms, and he lost his wife. He would have committed suicide after that had the arms not gotten into his mind and convinced him to take back what he had lost, replacing his agony with anger. He was an anti-villain, and a well written anti-villain can actually be in many ways can be more fascinating than a regular villain or an anti-hero.

I like that. @ MessiahDecoy; I explained that Batman was improved because it gave him back his dark quality, and as Octoberist pointed out, his tech improved after that as well. As for Venom, his inconsistent personality-villain, anti-villain, hero, anti-hero, Spidey's enemy, Spidey's ally, the innocent must be protected but SOME innocents are ok to kill-put me off the comics version of him years ago. Seeing him as a true dark reflection of Spider-Man was far more entertaining.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Frank Miller made Batman darker before Tim Burton did.

Burton did make the dark version popular though.

 

[Brother Jack]

Burton's Batman, afterall, did create the 'grappling gun' inwhich became a mainstay in the comics later. (Before, Batman was seen with a Batarang attach to a piece of rope). So I'd say it did help improve Batman on a superficial level.

The grappling gun was in Dark Knight Returns before that. I don't know if it appeared elsewhere before.