Fan Boyz Rule the Box Office. We need more of them.

[DarkSuperman]

More fan boys should become directors. The Cinema would be a much more exciting place.

Comic Books are a medium with longevity. Many of these Characters like Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man have survived for almost a century. Why? Because they're so freaking cool. The general public has a knowledge of them and they don't need them dumbed down or altered to fit our reality. We know men don't fly and that billionaires don't dress up as Bats to fight crime. Yet, we don't care because if we did we probably wouldn't like them in the first place.

Several of the BIGGEST comics book hits in recent years were almost DIRECT translations from the comics! This is a beautiful thing because many of those movies were OBSCURE comics that the general public had never heard of yet went out to the Cinema in Droves to See! Hellboy, Sin City, 300, etc.

If MORE film makers stopped trying to dumb down the material and just translated it exactly from page to screen they wouldn't lose the magic that has kept them alive for 60+ Years! For those about to criticize me and throw out titles like Batman and Robin...that wasn't Done Well. Any idea can be turned into crap if warped and twisted into idiocy.


BOTTOM LINE? Fan boys ARE Fan Boys because the comics are SO damn good that they awaken feelings are extremely love. The ONLY reason why the general public aren't "Fan boys" Themselves is because they aren't fans of the comic book medium. Ohhh they love the stories in the comics, for sure. They just don't feel like reading them, thats where movies come in. To present the material in an easy format for a wider audience. That doesn't entitle Hollywood to destroy the source material on a whim because they "THINK" they know more than profession writers and artists who have been capturing the imaginations of millions for generations. If Comics were translated more accurately to screen without un-needed changes, ordinary people would love them Just as Much as "Fan Boys" if not more so.

There's a difference between "Realism" and "Generalization" which Directors like Singer and Nolan do. Do they make nice movies? Yes. Are they as good as they could have been had they made them exactly, precisely, and unequivocally faithfully to the source material? No.

Robert Rodriguez, Zack Snyder, and Sam Raimi are incredible men who understand both mediums, Comics AND Film, thus they create visually stunning masterpieces that please a huge majority.

Hopefully, more fan boys like them will get the freedom they want to continue to astound us with fantastic movies, true to the comics. Because if they're what it means to be a fan boy, then sign me up to be one too.

 

[Billy Batson]

Great read and I do agree.

I would also like to add, that alot of the general public grew up on these characters as Saturday Morning Cartoon Shows. I for one, became a fan through the Television series of those characters. After falling in love with the characters through that medium, did I discover the comics on the characters. To continue the journey of my beloved Heroes, reading the comic books became a most.

 

[Billy Batson]

----

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I read and I don't agree.

First off, if you say direct translations are what Hollywood should do then Raimi is off that list. All three Spider-Man movies were generalizations of stories from the comics. Comic writers themselves are fanboys who love the characters and materials, but they turn out crap as much as anyone in any other creative field. There's no such thing as a formula. You can make the most literal translation of Ghost World, Sin City, or whatever, but if the audience doesn't show up then who cares? You pleased yourself and the fans of the comic, but that won't get you a sequel or another directing job.

Hellboy wasn't a hit. Sin City is a quasi hit. 300 is the only movie to surpass all expectations.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Yea but for every good fanboy director like Sam Raimi and Robert Rodriguez, you have a bad one like MSJ and Tim Story

 

[wellsy]

You do realise that you are talking about wildly different media here?

Comic book series can go on for a dozen or more books, whereas a movie, to tell the same story, has to compress it down to a two hour movie. In that compression, there is a fair bit that is lost, and there are some things that you can get away with in a book that you can't on the big screen.

Not to mention that you also need good actors who can fit into the roles, and a good story to base it on (and comic book writers can turn out plenty of drivel... as can manga writers, I shall admit).

In short, comic book stories aren't all you hype them up to be, and by doing a generalised, but unique story, the director is given more room to manouvre. An adaptation is stifling, and very difficult to pull of successfully (300 et al being the excpetions... and Hellboy isn't among those excpetions).

 

[TheVileOne]

Being a fan, or not being a fan could be a blessing or a curse.

Nicholas Meyer knew absolutely nothing about Star Trek before he did Wrath of Khan. But what did he bring to the table? A fresh perspective. A perspective of a guy that came from the literary world, and a guy that finally saw the idea in incorporating nautical elements into Trek.

And what did he do? He made what's considered one of the best Trek movies ever, and what has become a template itself for countless number of action movies and sequels.

Being fans and people who truly love and care about the material helps. But it also gives them a bias and makes them more attached to it than they should.

I mean of course the directors of these movies that were not fans and didn't respect the material certainly f'd them up good (Pitof).

 

[Dr. Fate]

Great read and I do agree.

I would also like to add, that alot of the general public grew up on these characters as Saturday Morning Cartoon Shows. I for one, became a fan through the Television series of those characters. After falling in love with the characters through that medium, did I discover the comics on the characters. To continue the journey of my beloved Heroes, reading the comic books became a most.

I too discovered most of these characters through animation or film adaptations.

And VileOne brings up a good point with the Nicholas Meyer thing.

 

[Justice Bringer]

Plus its generally easier to adapt oneshot graphic novels; 300, Sin City, The Watchmen etc to the bigscreen in a similar fashion to the source material...

than Superman, Batman etc... whos source material is in constant flux and extremely vast.

 

[Dr. Fate]

Plus its generally easier to adapt oneshot graphic novels; 300, Sin City, The Watchmen etc to the bigscreen in a similar fashion to the source material...

than Superman, Batman etc... whos source material is in constant flux and extremely vast.

No argument here.

 

[Changeling]

i dont agree

 

[DarkSuperman]

Plus its generally easier to adapt oneshot graphic novels; 300, Sin City, The Watchmen etc to the bigscreen in a similar fashion to the source material...

than Superman, Batman etc... whos source material is in constant flux and extremely vast.

Thats not true. Their are tons of "Year One" stories that can pose as introduction to these characters. Not to mention, comic book authors have been crafting new stories for DECADES.

To argue that it's "Hard" to write a story based on source material thats in constant flux and vast is untrue. If anything the vastness give you more to work with. Writers have 60+ years worth of characters and stories to amalgamate and explore from a different perspective for new audiences.
Their are like 4 different Law & Orders and CSI television shows and somehow those writers seem to come up with stories just fine.

As I write this I recall mention that a direct translation is impossible, however I feel that many misconstrue EXACTLY what I mean by that.

Comic Books are magical. Just as magical and awe inspiring as stories like Lord of the Rings or The Chronicles of Narnia. 2 movies which were massive hits BTW. Upon viewing those I was amazed at how accurately those worlds and those characters were presented On screen. It wasn't some version of LOTR based on early England to be more realistic. Narnia didn't make the talking animals products of genetic experiment to explain their being able to talk. It was the world I had always imagined in my head made literally real on screen. It was like seeing an old friend for the first time...

LIKEWISE, when "Fan boys" Ask for "Direct Translation" Raimi does fall under that category. Raimi created the Spider-Man that I had been watching on Saturday morning cartoons. He completely captured the thrill, imagination, and wonder of the character. It was like watching him come to life. I saw the first Spider-Man three times because I couldn't get over the fact that I was actually seeing MY Spider-Man swing around New York. It didn't matter that his web shooters now organic or that the spider was now genetically engineered, what mattered was that Spider-Man was captured 90% the way I remember him. He LOOKED the way Spider-man was SUPPOSED to LOOK. He MOVED the way Spider-Man was SUPPOSED to Move.

In Essence he WAS Spider-Man. I'm grateful to Raimi for giving me that. It was one of the most magical times I'd ever had at a theater. All "Fan Boys" Really want is to see the real interpretation of the characters the way they were supposed to be presented. The Accurate and Amazing interpretations that made them popular in the first place.

I DON'T need my Batman to wear hard rubber and be trained by Ra's Al Ghul (whose name they said wrong throughout the film. Still Urks me.) I DON'T need Superman to have an illegitimate child and have less speaking lines than anyone else in the movie.

I want to see my Heroes be Heroes, the way we REALLY want them to be. I understand peoples need to come to the defense of films like Superman Returns and Batman Begins, because they enjoyed them. However, the bottom line is all those films really only showed more of the same thing that we have been seeing for 20+ years. The "Hollywood" versions of those larger than life figures. An to be quite honest, the Hollywood versions are Pale shadows of the genuine articles. Film makers like Raimi and Snyder manage to make amazing films and keep the integrity and spirit of these Grandiose worlds where anything can happen.

Lois was right to write that Article the World Doesn't need a Superman. She just failed to specify which one, Singers. I mean really...who thought it was a good idea to ground a story about an alien with godlike powers, living in a fictional city, populated by fictional characters in reality? Why weigh Superman down with that "As the World turns" baggage? Apparently reality means melodramatic nonsense. Why neuter Batman by dumbing down his Intelligence and Brilliance, both as a Detective and as a Martial Artist. Its what the people WANT to see. Instead they give them watered down, diluted, and insipid, pale generic imitations...like Crystal Pepsi.

Heroes Die. Legends Live Forever.

 

[DarkSuperman]

I'd like to take the opportunity to show those who need further proof of what incredible work fan boys can do, if the right ones are chosen that is. People like the director below, who actually love the characters and will do everything in their power to elevate them to a level beyond what was done before have my complete and utter respect.

Please, Watch the Video below and comment.

http://www.lefrelonvert-court.com/index.php?page=videos

 

[Justice Bringer]

Its because WB wanted Nolan and Singer to not make comicbook movies. Not to make bigscreen adaptions of actual specific trades.

The idea they wanted was to take the material and put it as a back framework while taking the characters and putting them in a real-world context. Personally I have a feeling DC will keep this consistent in all their DCU superhero films (so that a future JLA film will be able to fit into the realworld environment of BB/SR)

It really comes down to personal preference but I definitely prefer this approach. Spider-man 3 was the most comicbook-oriented of all the Spidey films and it generally wasnt received so well (I personally disliked it strongly).

I prefer the versimilitude approach. I think a vast amount of fans and critics alike do.

 

[DarkSuperman]

Its because WB wanted Nolan and Singer to not make comicbook movies. Not to make bigscreen adaptions of actual specific trades.

The idea they wanted was to take the material and put it as a back framework while taking the characters and putting them in a real-world context. Personally I have a feeling DC will keep this consistent in all their DCU superhero films (so that a future JLA film will be able to fit into the realworld environment of BB/SR)

It really comes down to personal preference but I definitely prefer this approach. Spider-man 3 was the most comicbook-oriented of all the Spidey films and it generally wasnt received so well (I personally disliked it strongly).

I prefer the versimilitude approach. I think a vast amount of fans and critics alike do.

I think its more about story quality and tightness, rather than being too comic booky.

 

[Justice Bringer]

If thats the case, then don't complain about Batman's rubber suit.

 

[DarkSuperman]

If thats the case, then don't complain about Batman's rubber suit.

Rubber Suits aren't quality, nor do they accurately represent Batman.

 

[wellsy]

DarkSupes, perhaps the problem is in just how many versions of Superman/Batman/... there are, how many origin stories, etc. The idea of a direct translation, as I said earlier, constricts the director. A director considers him/herself an artist. Thus, they are looking for ways to put their own print on the movie.

With comic books, this is especially so, because there are so many adaptations, ideas and ideals, that they won't be able to please anyone. Do you do pre-Crisis or post-Crisis? Do you do this story or that story?

In the end, what you end up getting in general is a character who is an amalgamation of the above. It adds to the continuing development of these characters (it was pointed out elsewhere that had there been no change in Supes, he'd still be leaping across boundaries instead of flying).

 

[GeoffTheArtist]

Everytime I log onto these type of debates all I hear is b!tching and moaning about "fanboys" wanting absolutely accurate translations. These minor trifles that stray from the source material are sometimes (at best) trivial things (i.e. everything that people found wrong with SR and BB). While some I can agree with (the bastard child of Superman) others I must say 'nay' (Batman's constant use of supposedly kevlar but actually rubber suits). In the end we're there to be entertained, not to pick the film piece by piece saying, "Hay, that wasn't in the comics! Boo! This movie sucks!" Sure, Nolan's goin' the realism route. Sure, Singer went the 'copy Donner' route. But in the end, can you say you were not entertained? Hmmm? Fanboys and girls? Huh. The word 'fanboy' makes me think of an elitist group of comic book/movie/etc. fans, who will nitpick and criticize until the second coming of Christ. Oh, the irony! I'm a fanboy, too. Go figure.

 

[Changeling]

^ I know!

 

[KenK]

I DON'T need my Batman to wear hard rubber and be trained by Ra's Al Ghul (whose name they said wrong throughout the film. Still Urks me.)

Actually, the movie's pronunciation of the name is more likely to be the correct one, according to the people of Arab descent that I've spoken with on the subject.

Sure, Nolan's goin' the realism route. Sure, Singer went the 'copy Donner' route. But in the end, can you say you were not entertained?

In the case of Superman Returns, yes I can honestly say I wasn't entertained, because that was a case of the filmmakers rehashing something that had already been done 30 years prior, when fans were dying for something new.

 

[GeoffTheArtist]

In the case of Superman Returns, yes I can honestly say I wasn't entertained, because that was a case of the filmmakers rehashing something that had already been done 30 years prior, when fans were dying for something new.

Hmm. I haven't seen SR since theaters. Good point.