The "realism" thread

[The Question]

Here we're going to discuss the concept of realism in comic book movies. It's a topic which I personally feel is being pushed too far, between the subdued fantasy aspects in movies such as Captain America (going for a more "military" looking costume rather than his traditional duds) and The Dark Knight, and the popularity of Kick-Ass. It's little wonder so many fans are falling under this spell and saying they want things like a more home-made looking costume for Spider-Man or a more durable one for Superman. We seem to be forgetting that comic books are fantasy. Superheroes are not a part of the real world. Certain realistic aspects are fine, but while nobody wants to see another absurd nonsense-fest like Batman & Robin, we shouldn't let the pendulum get pushed too far the other way, lest we end up losing the things we love about these characters and stories in the first place.
Discuss.

I am a little curious: What's wrong with that, exactly?

 

[roach]

because the comics suit doesnt look homemade

 

[Chris Wallace]

EXACTAMUNDO!!!!
This does not look like something a teenager with no money and no experience could have cobbled together from what he could find at home.

So why should this?

 

[roach]

then again this is the same poor kid who also built webspinners, webfluid for the spinners,spidertracers that link up with his spidersense.....

 

[Chris Wallace]

I think the "comic book feel" of a film died with Batman and Robin. I just don't believe that the GA reacts as much to a complete "comic book" movie.

Studios are afraid of coming off as a comic book film. Even Spider-man had dark colors. I don't think the GA reacts well to strictly comic book films unless they have that real world feel to them. Even the Spider-man films had that real world feel to it. Not "realism", but real characters and it's harder to get that with absurdity. Kick-ass is an example of that. I felt the best parts of the films were ones when the character felt real and it was a bit more grounded in reality.

It's easier to make and sell a film that doesn't have a bit more (for lack of a better word) realistic than a comic book feel. I just don't feel like many films even had a comic book feel to it. The only ones off the top of my head I felt had a complete comic book feel are the Schumacher Batman films, Iron Man 2 and the Superman films. Iron Man 1 was pretty faithful but it had a real world feel to it.

With Captain America, when you add the costume, you lose the real world feel. Keep in mind that Captain America would've been the only one in the film that would've had bright colors. When you lose that real world feel, you lose relatability and risk alienating the audiences. I'm not saying that would exactly happen, but if you're working for a studio why risk the possibility when you could gross as much (or more) with a modified suit.

I hope both of you understand that I'm not parading and championing "Realism", but trying to make people understand why Hollywood does the things it do.

WHile noone wants to go to the extreme of Batman & Robin, we mus tremember that Batman & Robin WAS NOT a "complete" comic book movie. It was cheesiness on a level that we hadn't seen in comics in decades, with no respect shown for either the GA or the core fanbase. So that is not the example to go by. But to go the complete opposite direction-a "Wanted" type film, for example-isn't any better.
Spider-Man is the only one in the film with bright colors. Superman is the only one in the film with bright colors. Daredevil is the only one in the film with bright colors. So what? Why are we ashamed to show superheroes in all their glory? I don't see how a black rubber suit preserves the "real world feel" any more than red and blue tights do. I don't see how burgundy gloves are more believable than red ones, on a man who's supposed to be a symbol of American patriotism.
I feel like they made the same mistake w/Cap that Singer & Co. made with Superman. Excessive toning down to the point where you lose what makes Captain America Captain America. And it looks like crap. The only saving grace is that maybe-just MAYBE-we can get a better one for Avengers.

 

[JAK®]

The realism argument became farcical as soon as someone made the argument that grey wasn't a realistic colour.

 

[Chris Wallace]

then again this is the same poor kid who also built webspinners, webfluid for the spinners,spidertracers that link up with his spidersense.....

The tracking unit for before he learned how to link them up with his spider-sense, impact webbing, spider-stingers (if Ben could do it, he could do it)
I guess those should look cobbled together as well, like Blankman's gadgets or something.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

not to start an arguement but what is this based on????
Has there been a superhero movie that had bright costumes and the GA couldnt get into it?
Why is the costume the main source of real world feel and relatability????

I'm not trying to start an argument either so thanks for not snapping back at me.

It's based on the fact that studios want to appeal to as many audiences as possible and that a costume plays a huge part of the appeal as it's seen in many advertisements and plays a huge part in marketing campaigns. People want to see the hero and appeal to. Bright colors seem to be taken less seriously.

Even Spider-man had darker colors than his comic book version. Iron Man also, and so did Batman. All the successful comic book film series had darker colors than their comic counter parts so that's one of the features studios will look in terms figuring what parts will be successful.

And in terms of your question of the audiences and relatability: the Captain America film in 1990 comes to mind. I know, it's not a reason for why it couldn't work today and I'm not saying that. But audiences who had seen couldn't get into the costume. There was also a weak explanation of the suit too.

Think of the WWII factor too. I'm not saying it but it could be possible that it could been seen as direspectful to not only US soldiers, but soldiers around the world if the a guy who "was in a flag suit" singlehandedly won a war. Not my reason, but just a though of mine.

WHile noone wants to go to the extreme of Batman & Robin, we mus tremember that Batman & Robin WAS NOT a "complete" comic book movie. It was cheesiness on a level that we hadn't seen in comics in decades, with no respect shown for either the GA or the core fanbase. So that is not the example to go by. But to go the complete opposite direction-a "Wanted" type film, for example-isn't any better.

Still, this is what the GA thinks when they think comic books. Cheesy, over-the-top actions that is believed to be for a "niche" audience.

Spider-Man is the only one in the film with bright colors. Superman is the only one in the film with bright colors. Daredevil is the only one in the film with bright colors. So what? Why are we ashamed to show superheroes in all their glory? I don't see how a black rubber suit preserves the "real world feel" any more than red and blue tights do. I don't see how burgundy gloves are more believable than red ones, on a man who's supposed to be a symbol of American patriotism.

Technically Spider-man's suit is a toned down from the comics. It isn't as bright. Captain America still has his colors too.

I feel like they made the same mistake w/Cap that Singer & Co. made with Superman. Excessive toning down to the point where you lose what makes Captain America Captain America. And it looks like crap. The only saving grace is that maybe-just MAYBE-we can get a better one for Avengers.

I don't think it looks bad. I think it looks great while not losing what Captain America is.

Film is different from comics, but I think it's overexaggerative if you think that a costume change is leading to these films completely being grounded in reality.

All in all, the studios try to balance realism and comic book feel of films because that appeals most to all audiences.

 

[JAK®]

No, I will not accept the notion that because the Spider-Man movie costume was a few shades darker, it somehow differs from the comic book version in any meaningful way.

 

[roach]

I'm not trying to start an argument either so thanks for not snapping back at me.

It's based on the fact that studios want to appeal to as many audiences as possible and that a costume plays a huge part of the appeal as it's seen in many advertisements and plays a huge part in marketing campaigns. People want to see the hero and appeal to. Bright colors seem to be taken less seriously.

but what is this based on??? What superhero movie failed because the costume was too out there or comicbooky???

Even Spider-man had darker colors than his comic book version. Iron Man also, and so did Batman. All the successful comic book film series had darker colors than their comic counter parts so that's one of the features studios will look in terms figuring what parts will be successful.

And in terms of your question of the audiences and relatability: the Captain America film in 1990 comes to mind. I know, it's not a reason for why it couldn't work today and I'm not saying that. But audiences who had seen couldn't get into the costume. There was also a weak explanation of the suit too.

bad example as that movie went straight to video

Think of the WWII factor too. I'm not saying it but it could be possible that it could been seen as direspectful to not only US soldiers, but soldiers around the world if the a guy who "was in a flag suit" singlehandedly won a war. Not my reason, but just a though of mine.

no one thought it was disrespectful when Brad Pitt and the Inglourious Basterds singlehandedly won the war.....but he's not wearing a flagsuit. You do realize that the guys who fought in WW2 read Captain America comics in their foxholes...Cap at the time of WW2 sold more than Time Magazine...so who are we offending?

I don't think it looks bad. I think it looks great while not losing what Captain America is.

Film is different from comics, but I think it's overexaggerative if you think that a costume change is leading to these films completely being grounded in reality.

All in all, the studios try to balance realism and comic book feel of films because that appeals most to all audiences.

Again show me one comicbook movie that failed because the costume wasnt real?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Again show me one comicbook movie that failed because the costume wasnt real?

Solely, none. But show me a comic book movie that failed solely because of costume changes. Films like Catwoman didn't failed just because of costumes. It failed because the story sucked, the acting sucked, etc., etc.

It still attributes to a film's failure not only to appeal to audiences, but to a film critcal success by critics and audiences alike.

But like you say before. A film's costume will not down a film, but if the story isn't good people or the film doesn't gross as much, a costume will take blame.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

No, I will not accept the notion that because the Spider-Man movie costume was a few shades darker, it somehow differs from the comic book version in any meaningful way.

Me either. I say it was faithful but we're talking strictly about colors.

With Captain America's costume, you still have the star, the red stripes, the A, the red, the white, the blue, and the wings. You can't tell me that's not Captain America.

 

[roach]

Solely, none. But show me a comic book movie that failed solely because of costume changes. Films like Catwoman didn't failed just because of costumes. It failed because the story sucked, the acting sucked, etc., etc.

It still attributes to a film's failure not only to appeal to audiences, but to a film critcal success by critics and audiences alike.

But like you say before. A film's costume will not down a film, but if the story isn't good people or the film doesn't gross as much, a costume will take blame.

How can a costume take the blame if we just said a costume will not make or break a movie?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

How can a costume take the blame if we just said a costume will not make or break a movie?

What I'm saying is that if a film is bad, the first thing people often point to is the costume. It's not the main reason a film is bad, but people will point to that the appearances stick out.

 

[WildcatNC]

It seems to me many people are just arguing about the definition of "realism".

I think most people, including me, don't mean "absolute" realism. Just that it effectively prevents the suspension of disbelief from being broken.

How the laws of physics act should seem plausible, Costume should look awesome and not be a distraction, consistency, etc.


Realism = Suspension of disbelief IMO.

 

[roach]

You know when I plunk down the cash to see a movie called Superman...I am pretty sure I am gonna get a guy flying in a suit doing superheroic things.....I am pretty sure the GA expect the same.
Yes we'd like there to be realistic things in these movies but I dont see anyone walking out of a Spider-man movie because its not plausible to gain spider abilities from being bitten by a radioactive spider....just saying

 

[Bat-Mite]

The realism argument became farcical as soon as someone made the argument that grey wasn't a realistic colour.

And the premise of this thread is farcical until someone comes up with concrete evidence that the supposed realism trend is having a substantial effect other than on costumes. And considering that Superman and Spider-Man have been the only major players (AFAIK) to have comic accurate costumes, I think it would be safe to say this is more of an issue of dealing with two different mediums than it is with realism. Burton didn't give a damn about realism, but his batmovies still ended up with a suit that was different from the comics. When a hero's powers are altered or removed for the sake of realism, then it would be safe to say it's going too far. It's beyond silly to say that Cap having darker red on his gloves is realism run amok. Looking at the Hellboy movies, the character has feet instead of the hooves of his comic book counterpart... with all these fairies, elves, zombies, angels, trolls, clockwork monsters, and Lovecraftian horrors running around, do any of you guys honestly think that that was a decision inspired by realism? But yet that's the conclusion we should jump to based on the logic of some of the posts in this thread.

 

[BlackLantern]

I think they just gave Hellboy boots because it was a hell of a lot easier to do it that way instead of building out hooves, getting Ron Perlman to learn how to walk in them and so forth, when it works just as good to put boots on him

 

[BlackLantern]

I think they just gave Hellboy boots because it was a hell of a lot easier to do it that way instead of building out hooves, getting Ron Perlman to learn how to walk in them and so forth, when it works just as good to put boots on him

 

[Bat-Mite]

They probably just would have used CGI if they decided to go with hooves. I think Del Toro even discusses going with boots for the sake of convenience on the commentary of one of the movies. But yeah, my point is that this whole realism thing can be taken to ridiculous lengths if you try to apply it to every single thing that you don't like about a film that also isn't comic book accurate.

 

[BlackLantern]

most definitely....I also think some things just translate easier than others...Iron Mans suit is easy because its armor, its a fairly "easy" thing to interpret and replicate as opposed to say a costume like Spider-Man or Daredevil

IMO Daredevil had one of the best iterations of a costume in a live action film

 

[jmc]

From my perspective, the 'realism' thing is blown completely out of proportion. The fact of the matter is if there's a logic and reason behind the outfit it's going to be easily more accepted by the masses. If it makes sense, even semi-sense, then suspension of disbelief is made easier, suddenly that silly costume has some substance, depth and tangibility to it. And there's nothing wrong with that, there's nothing wrong with segmented costume pieces, with texture, with logic. To use the excuse that it's 'just a superhero film' is kinda lazy, if that's the mind set then fans shouldn't be surprised if people don't take the film seriously, and that's ultimately what it boils down to. For the genre to be taken seriously it has to be treated as such. There's a reason simplicity is paramount in comics, it's because there isn't the time to go into great detail, if there was the time I'd hazard a guess many of the characters we have know be far more detailed, maybe even look completely different. Comics and film really are two completely different mediums, they're not really as adaptable as people think, so there's gotta be compromise somewhere, and to date I think most films have done exactly that.

 

[JAK®]

And the premise of this thread is farcical until someone comes up with concrete evidence that the supposed realism trend is having a substantial effect other than on costumes. And considering that Superman and Spider-Man have been the only major players (AFAIK) to have comic accurate costumes, I think it would be safe to say this is more of an issue of dealing with two different mediums than it is with realism. Burton didn't give a damn about realism, but his batmovies still ended up with a suit that was different from the comics. When a hero's powers are altered or removed for the sake of realism, then it would be safe to say it's going too far. It's beyond silly to say that Cap having darker red on his gloves is realism run amok. Looking at the Hellboy movies, the character has feet instead of the hooves of his comic book counterpart... with all these fairies, elves, zombies, angels, trolls, clockwork monsters, and Lovecraftian horrors running around, do any of you guys honestly think that that was a decision inspired by realism? But yet that's the conclusion we should jump to based on the logic of some of the posts in this thread.

I agree that the films themselves don't put as much stock in realism as the fans are saying.

But looking at the posts in this forum it's clear that there are a lot of fans that put realism on a pedestal. Especially if you go to the Batman forums. That's what I meant with my "grey isn't a realistic colour" comment. That most of this realism debate is something within the fanbase, not necessarily within the movies themselves.

So no, I don't think this thread is farcical, it's a valid criticism of the mentality seen across these boards.

 

[roach]

I believe this is a made up excuse. There is no evidence to suggest that the GA cant accept a silly little costume. Of all the superhero movie that have come out...of the ones that have fail it was not because of the costume.
Where are we getting this information that costumes have to be real in order for the GA to accept it???

 

[BlackLantern]

I believe this is a made up excuse. There is no evidence to suggest that the GA cant accept a silly little costume. Of all the superhero movie that have come out...of the ones that have fail it was not because of the costume.
Where are we getting this information that costumes have to be real in order for the GA to accept it???

maybe not "real", but there needs to be some sort of explanation that the GA will accept, unless you just start the movie with them in costume

remember, these are people that tune into American Idol and Jersey Shore in record numbers, they are not all that bright collectively