Has a comic book movie ever surpassed the original material???

[OtepApe]

Just because the comic book came first, doesn't mean it can't be done better in a movie. I just want to know if it has ever happened.

 

[Spider-Fan]

That is hard to answer, since most comics have had bad writers on the book. In general, I'd say no, but if I were to compare Raimi's Spider-Man movies to JMS's Spider-Man, I prefer Raimi's movies to that, but by that same token give me the Lee run on Spidey anytime.

 

[Dope Nose]

maybe Blade.

 

[co2]

I couldn't get into reading V for Vendetta very easily, but the film knocked me out.
Most of these comcis that are becoming films have been around for decades and somewhere along the way they sucked to some degree...every one of them has been bad at some point. So really it depends on what we are comparing here.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

I'd say this one is about as close as it comes.

Blade turned a character that even Marvel didn't know what the hell to do with, into an awesome badass vampire killing machine.

To bad, Marvel still doesn't know what the hell to do with him. As his latest ongoing series stinks to high hell.

 

[Dope Nose]

from

to

 

[patrickbateman]

Blade

 

[hippie_hunter]

Definetely Blade.

 

[CaptainCanada]

I was more interested in the film version of the Hulk than I ever was in the comic version.

 

[November Rain]

i'm not sure about film, but cartoon certainly...

look at what they did with venom and the symbiote in the 90s spidey cartoon, especially the symbiote's interaction with spider-man.


and there are aspects of certain characters that i like in movies like the hulk's growth and movement (because he is often portrayed as being fairly slow in comics at many occasions). that generally isn't shown in the comics.


i quite like movie hulk. I also like the fact wolverine is a lil taller in the x-men films. I do also like dick tracy.

saying this though, i think its hard to say because there are so many renditions of a character over the years and a film only has a limited amount of time to portray only one. Most people will have 60 odd years of backlog and pick their best character versions to compare to their film counterparts.

I guess if the movies were that good, then people wouldn't be complaining so much on the hype

 

[Kevin Roegele]

maybe Blade.

F****** BINGO!

 

[Addendum]

Blade is the only one.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Superman the Movie.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Blade and Dick Tracy.

 

[War Lord]

Each medium has its advantages and disadvantages.

With comics, they can show amazing things, but you can't really get a feel for what has happened, especially if it breaks the laws of physics or is on a cosmic scale.

With movies, you can get a better feel for what has happened, but for a movie to be good it also has to have a realistic feel so it has to be more bound by the laws of physics and can't really show things on a cosmic scale as well.

 

[SurfDUI]

Gulluermo's Blade II screenplay was the best Blade story since the inception of the character.

A feat that will likely never be surpassed.

 

[KenK]

Gulluermo's Blade II screenplay was the best Blade story since the inception of the character.

A feat that will likely never be surpassed.

Well, David Goyer wrote the screenplay, but clearly Guillermo Del Toro made the resulting film what it was. A lot of the visuals are inspired by his own sketches, as well as some conceptual art by Mike Mignola.

I agree, Marvel can't seem to do much with him in comics, which is a shame, because Goyer, Snipes, and the directors really brought the character to life.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Each medium has its advantages and disadvantages.

With comics, they can show amazing things, but you can't really get a feel for what has happened, especially if it breaks the laws of physics or is on a cosmic scale.

With movies, you can get a better feel for what has happened, but for a movie to be good it also has to have a realistic feel so it has to be more bound by the laws of physics and can't really show things on a cosmic scale as well.

By this logic Star Wars, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, LOTR, The Last Starfighter, Iron Giant and several other "fantasy" epics don't exist.

Comics do an excellent job of grounding and explaining the reasons for what's going on. There are volumes of books written to explain the X-Men's powers, comics that explain the foundations and rules that govern the MU and DCU, explainations for alternate realities. If anything the drawback of comics is that they tend to stretch short stories over a long period of time JUST because they want to give you a feel for what has occurred.

Movies drawback is simply time, comics have years to explain one event...even if that explanation comes after the fact. Movies don't. They have to be somewhat self contained. And everything must tie back to the plot, as opposed to comic which can reference other comics, or have intertwining stories. Also comics can explain a single moment better than a movie can.

Perhaps this is where your "grounded in reality" misconception comes from. LOTR HAD to be long if they wished to completely do that movie. Same with STAR WARS. It takes time to establish the setting and characters, whereas comics have an eternity, movies have one hour and thirty minutes. But there is nothing comic can accomplish that movies cannot.

 

[SuperFerret]

Blade, definitely.

as for V for Vendetta, the book was better overall, but the movie's ending was the better ending to me.

 

[CConn]

Apart from the obvious answer in Blade, and the rather excellent (I think) point made by Spider-Fan930, I will say, there are some movies that I prefer more than specific comics.

As a pure origin of Batman, I actually preferred Begins greatly over, say, Year One. I'm not saying they Begins-ify the comics, but as a single work of fiction, I think BB's quite a bit better than YO. I think Superman: The Movie was probably a better origin for Superman than anything that had come before it (although, it has certainly be surpassed several times since then), so there's a few movies that beat out a few particular comic stories.

That said, I think one thing some people get confused about, and one thing that's just downright wrong, is when it's said that a movie or even series of movies, are better than the comics in general. Yeah, BB was good, and STM was good, but nothing (save for Blade) can really trump the total accumulated comic...lore. That's always the paramount when talking about a comic character.

 

[Kool-Aid]

Batman Begins
Blade
Ninja Turtles
ummmm Ghost World
V for Vendetta
Superman

 

[Addendum]

With comics, they can show amazing things, but you can't really get a feel for what has happened, especially if it breaks the laws of physics or is on a cosmic scale.

Galactus, Devourer of Worlds

Silver Surfer

Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, who created the above 3 characters, were able to convey what happened, even when it was on a cosmic scale. Just pick up a copy of their run on the Fantastic Four, and Jack Kirby's Fourth World Saga from DC.

 

[November Rain]

Batman Begins
Blade
Ninja Turtles
ummmm Ghost World
V for Vendetta
Superman

i had the turtle comics, they were pretty hardcore

it's the 90s cartoon that makes them seem kinda geeky. The movie was more based on the actual comics i feel.

 

[Chris Wallace]

V For Vendetta
Blade

 

[SurfDUI]

sig

Red or Blue-
Blood or Cuz,
It's still a street squad
Give it some time-
and see what it does.

Least I don't have to read disparaging things about the Tony Stark (Civil War whithstanding)t: