Which do you prefer ? MCU characters vs Comic book versions

[harryoscop]

CB Spidey over the MCU any day. It goes CB > Tobey/Andrew > Tom for me, easily.

MCU Cap is wonderful, though.

Same

 

[DalekbusterFitz]

There's no option for MCU Quake, so I opted for 'Other MCU character you prefer'.

 

[marcvader]

Since I haven't read comics regularly since the late 80's early 90's my perspective made me choose for the most part the comic counterpart.

 

[GeckoMoria]

This isn't a fair post. Comic Spider-man vs MCU Spider-man who has 15 minutes of screentime? Come on. At least put his post after Infinity Wars when the characters will have a decade on their backs.

 

[marcvader]

I'd be curious to see what the poll results would be on an actual nonmovie comicbook site.

 

[harryoscop]

Marc They'd heavily skew towards the movie side because most of them never read any comics. The MCU versions of these characters are all they know.

Also, props to comic Spidey for destroying MCU Spidey

 

[GeckoMoria]

I can assure you to general movie audiences Holland's spider-man is THE definite spider-man so don't take the results of a character with 50 years of history over one with 15 minutes of screen time to heart.

Oh, who am i kidding? You are gonna twist it any way you like no matter how many times people shoot you down

 

[harryoscop]

I can assure you to general movie audiences Holland's spider-man is THE definite spider-man so don't take the results of a character with 50 years of history over one with 15 minutes of screen time to heart.

Oh, who am i kidding? You are gonna twist it any way you like no matter how many times people shoot you down

Wrong. Tobey Maguire's version is the definitive Spider-Man to the general audience. He destroyed Holland in the worldwide poll that was conducted by BuzzFeed. This was strictly for the general audience and he dwarfed Holland by thousands of votes. Garfield easily beat Holland too. So sorry, Tom ain't the definitive Spidey to the general audience.

 

[Panacea]

Yet...

 

[harryoscop]

Hey, it's possible. But Garfield had two movies that made a **** ton of money at the BO and Maguire still destroyed him. Holland had 10 minutes of screentime, why would he be the best in the GA eyes? Don't assume he's the best in everybody's eyes just because he's in the MCU. Here's a link to the poll:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jasminnaha...movie-opinions?utm_term=.loVOOWEqo#.lu833x0pL

 

[Batmannerism]

Hey, it's possible. But Garfield had two movies that made a **** ton of money at the BO and Maguire still destroyed him. Holland had 10 minutes of screentime, why would he be the best in the GA eyes? Don't assume he's the best in everybody's eyes just because he's in the MCU. Here's a link to the poll:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jasminnaha...movie-opinions?utm_term=.loVOOWEqo#.lu833x0pL

We'll have a better indication after homecoming. Have to say though, personally, I didn't mind Garfield and I loved Maguire, but Tom Holland brought something neither of them quite managed to pull off - the dorky teenager, without being cringe worthy.

If Homecoming lives up to the promos, I think it has a real shot at being the definitive Spider Man movie (and I'm a huge fan of Raimi's first two films, although I found SM 2 a bit long).

We'll know soon enough. As for the repeated argument that a film or two doesn't compare to decades of history, well I'm not so sure. Sometimes a film manages to take a very 2 dimensional character and really give him/her some depth (not to flog a dead horse, but Cap is my number one example, I'll take TWS and CW Cap over 70 years of a very dull character any day). Of course, movies can do the opposite as well, take a much loved and well-rounded character and make him or her completely unwatchable ( e.g. Superman, I'd take even the worst Superman story over B v S, and that's saying a lot).

I think this rings true for villains as much as heroes. To me, Baron Zemo was a guy who cackled maniacally while wearing something Elton John would wear if he went to a KKK meeting. The film version humanized him and made him a very understandable and relatable character - I don't think Daniel
Bruhl gets anywhere enough credit, if you watch CW carefully the expression on his face when he finally confronts Cap and Tony is the coldest hate I that I've ever seen on the big screen.
Of course comic Ultron is vastly superior to MCU Ultron, so I can't say it's true in all, or even most cases ( MCU Loki I'd say is about equal to comic Loki who's had some ups and downs IMO) and of course Malekith doesn't help the MCU case at all. Ugh, the comic version is infinitely better.

Of course Michael Keaton's Vulture, all 15 seconds we've seen of him is a
huge improvement over 50 years of a bald guy in a green buzzard suit, I mean come on.....

I'm very curious to see how Thanos turns out. Seeing him smile is a bit at odds with my recollections of the character, from back in the early days when Jim Starlin (yo Marvel, Dreadstar movie, are you hearing me ?) created him.

I think Thanos has a real chance to be something special, but equally something forgettable. We'll see I guess.

 

[harryoscop]

We'll have a better indication after homecoming. Have to say though, personally, I didn't mind Garfield and I loved Maguire, but Tom Holland brought something neither of them quite managed to pull off - the dorky teenager, without being cringe worthy.

If Homecoming lives up to the promos, I think it has a real shot at being the definitive Spider Man movie (and I'm a huge fan of Raimi's first two films, although I found SM 2 a bit long).

We'll know soon enough. As for the repeated argument that a film or two doesn't compare to decades of history, well I'm not so sure. Sometimes a film manages to take a very 2 dimensional character and really give him/her some depth (not to flog a dead horse, but Cap is my number one example, I'll take TWS and CW Cap over 70 years of a very dull character any day). Of course, movies can do the opposite as well, take a much loved and well-rounded character and make him or her completely unwatchable ( e.g. Superman, I'd take even the worst Superman story over B v S, and that's saying a lot).

I think this rings true for villains as much as heroes. To me, Baron Zemo was a guy who cackled maniacally while wearing something Elton John would wear if he went to a KKK meeting. The film version humanized him and made him a very understandable and relatable character - I don't think Daniel
Bruhl gets anywhere enough credit, if you watch CW carefully the expression on his face when he finally confronts Cap and Tony is the coldest hate I that I've ever seen on the big screen.
Of course comic Ultron is vastly superior to MCU Ultron, so I can't say it's true in all, or even most cases ( MCU Loki I'd say is about equal to comic Loki who's had some ups and downs IMO) and of course Malekith doesn't help the MCU case at all. Ugh, the comic version is infinitely better.

Of course Michael Keaton's Vulture, all 15 seconds we've seen of him is a
huge improvement over 50 years of a bald guy in a green buzzard suit, I mean come on.....

I'm very curious to see how Thanos turns out. Seeing him smile is a bit at odds with my recollections of the character, from back in the early days when Jim Starlin (yo Marvel, Dreadstar movie, are you hearing me ?) created him.

I think Thanos has a real chance to be something special, but equally something forgettable. We'll see I guess.

The difference with Spider-Man vs Zemo & classic Cap is that in the comics he was already a great, well-rounded character that had emotional stories and the best supporting cast in the CBM genre. He was never dull & his stories had universal appeal. He doesn't need to be improved like those characters did. That's why Spidey unlike Captain America was the best selling Marvel title during many periods in Marvel's history. MCU will never surpass Comic book Spider-Man in my book and I heavily dislike the geeky, nerd wide-eyed kid thing they did to Spidey in Civil War (because IMO, that's not who Spider-Man is and he was never like that even as teen) but I'd rather not go into my problems with him again.

As for beating SM2... Homecoming definitely won't surpass Spider-Man 2 as the definitive Spider-Man movie if we're going by comic standards and I personally don't think it will surpass SM2 in critics eyes either. Said it before and I'll say it again: It will be a very good Spider-Man film but, the missing key elements that made Spider-Man 2 so powerful with taking key moments from the Comic Book story line and powerful themes are missing in the same sense that the Amazing Spider-Man films had an issue with. One of the MANY reasons as to why Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2 is very difficult to surpass is because of the Powerful messages of inspirations like Aunt May's "I Believe There's a Hero in All of Us" speech that relates to everyday real heroes of the world that we live in who sacrifice their own lives so that we may live. The Peter Parker Luck Curse from the comics which relates to everyday people living normal lifes (that's obviously missing from Homecoming with Peter having Stark a billionaire on speed dial) The "Spider-Man No More" storyline which relates to not having the will to push forward with something and giving in to one's own desires over what's right. That's a constant battle everybody struggles with. Spider-Man 2 captured the essence of what made Spider-Man such an amazing character with universal appeal.. Compare that to Homecoming. What will the central themes be? (at least going by the trailer) Getting one's homework done in time? What it means to be a teenager? Coming of Age? That's not going to reasonate wth critics in the same way SM2's messages did. Spider-Man 2 embodied what it means to be a powerful superhero and a vulnerable human being at the same time. It's still one of the best reviewed comic book movies of all time & in my opinion, a cinematic masterpiece.

I agree with you on Vulture though.

 

[Batmannerism]

The difference with Spider-Man vs Zemo & classic Cap is that in the comics he was already a great, well-rounded character that had emotional stories and the best supporting cast in the CBM genre. He was never dull & his stories had universal appeal. He doesn't need to be improved like those characters did. That's why Spidey unlike Captain America was the best selling Marvel title during many periods in Marvel's history. MCU will never surpass Comic book Spider-Man in my book and I heavily dislike the geeky, nerd wide-eyed kid thing they did to Spidey in Civil War (because IMO, that's not who Spider-Man is and he was never like that even as teen) but I'd rather not go into my problems with him again.

As for beating SM2... Homecoming definitely won't surpass Spider-Man 2 as the definitive Spider-Man movie if we're going by comic standards and I personally don't think it will surpass SM2 in critics eyes either. Said it before and I'll say it again: It will be a very good Spider-Man film but, the missing key elements that made Spider-Man 2 so powerful with taking key moments from the Comic Book story line and powerful themes are missing in the same sense that the Amazing Spider-Man films had an issue with. One of the MANY reasons as to why Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2 is very difficult to surpass is because of the Powerful messages of inspirations like Aunt May's "I Believe There's a Hero in All of Us" speech that relates to everyday real heroes of the world that we live in who sacrifice their own lives so that we may live. The Peter Parker Luck Curse from the comics which relates to everyday people living normal lifes (that's obviously missing from Homecoming with Peter having Stark a billionaire on speed dial) The "Spider-Man No More" storyline which relates to not having the will to push forward with something and giving in to one's own desires over what's right. That's a constant battle everybody struggles with. Spider-Man 2 captured the essence of what made Spider-Man such an amazing character with universal appeal.. Compare that to Homecoming. What will the central themes be? (at least going by the trailer) Getting one's homework done in time? What it means to be a teenager? Coming of Age? That's not going to reasonate wth critics in the same way SM2's messages did. Spider-Man 2 embodied what it means to be a powerful superhero and a vulnerable human being at the same time. It's still one of the best reviewed comic book movies of all time & in my opinion, a cinematic masterpiece.

I agree with you on Vulture though.

We'll have to agree to disagree, which is cool. Personally, I found the whole "Will I or won't I be Spider Man" the weakest part of the film, and it got in the way of the rest of the story. They could have dropped that whole storyline and the movie would have been better.....well that, and drowning a miniature son in a river (superheated steam cloud destroys NYC anyone ?).

I also disagree that SM 2 will always be the definitive Spider Man film - I don't even think it's that now. Similarly for me the Dark Knight is the best Batman film, and comes as close to being the definitive Batman film as possible - but I can't rule out the possibility that in a generation or two someone will make a film that's even better (not likely but it could happen, but it ain't gonna happen soon based on Batman's recent film appearances).

I never liked the Raimi version of Aunt May, sure she had the right look - right out of the comics, but I found her such a one-dimensional character, every time she gave Pete a pep talk it just made me cringe.

Homecoming looks like it's updated the Spider Man myth, so that it's kept those elements that make the character almost universally loved, but made cosmetic changes so he seems at home in today's world. To me Tom Holland really embodied what Peter Parker is all about with a very short amount of screen time - it will be interesting to see if the critics have such sharply differing views as you and I do.

I do agree that Spider Man (comic book) is a vastly superior character to comic book Cap, with a much much stronger supporting cast and rogues gallery. No doubt about it he's a strong contender for one of the best comic book characters of all time - for the reasons you mentioned. I can't remember whether I ticked MCU or comic book, because I remember some of the best Spider-Man stories, the Todd MacFarlane years, the Black costume and the emergence of Venom, and the saga with Morlun (although I'm not sure about SM;The Other)- but I didn't want a bar of all that clone nonsense and that superior Spider-Man stuff, ugh - that's as bad as Electric Blue Superman.

It's worth remembering that while the comic book versions of these characters all have moments we love to remember, they also have plenty of moments we'd love to forget, like this....

of course, then so do the movies, ( Peter Parker dance scene in Spider Man 3 anyone ?).

Cheers.

 

[AlluAllu]

Six arms Spider-Man was awesome.

 

[Batmannerism]

Six arms Spider-Man was awesome.

He could rub his tummy, scratch his ass, pick his nose, stifle a yawn and use the TV remote all at once and still have a hand left over.t:

 

[ernesth100]

They should have one movie rated R in the series(one with a symbiote, six armed spidey or a Daredevil/Kingpin crossover) just too see if they can get away with an R rated MCU film. Kinda like a test run.



....honestly nvm, they can get away with alot on a PG-13 rating as Wolverine has showed.

 

[AlluAllu]

He could rub his tummy, scratch his ass, pick his nose, stifle a yawn and use the TV remote all at once and still have a hand left over.t:

That actually sounds really great!

And there might be other uses for extra arms when it comes to relationships, but this forum is pg. t:

But to bring things back on topic, mcu has the advantage of easier consistency of characterisations. Comic book versions have had dozens of writers and each of them has had his or her idea of the character. For example Roger Stern's Spider-Man is not exactly like Dan Slott's. In mcu there will only be about 10 stories max for each character.

 

[Batmannerism]

That actually sounds really great!

And there might be other uses for extra arms when it comes to relationships, but this forum is pg. t:

But to bring things back on topic, mcu has the advantage of easier consistency of characterisations. Comic book versions have had dozens of writers and each of them has had his or her idea of the character. For example Roger Stern's Spider-Man is not exactly like Dan Slott's. In mcu there will only be about 10 stories max for each character.

That's true, but some characters have managed to have far more consistently good writing, rather than bad - luck maybe, or maybe certain characters are so well conceived that they are resistant to bad writing (Superman, Batman and Spider Man being examples) in the comics. In their movie versions Batman and Superman have had a couple of stinkers each.

Iron Man and Cap have certainly have benefitted from being well cast (by actors who've reprised their roles, unlike the Hulk) that has certainly made them appealing - but consistency isn't everything.

The MCU versions of Cap and Iron Man are conceived a bit differently than their comic book counterparts - perhaps in ways that are more relatable and engaging than the comic book characters.


In contrast I think Spidey has done reasonably well out of his film appearances, despite being played by 3 different actors, I didn't think much of SM3, ASM or ASM 2 but for the most part the character of Spidey himself came off pretty well (I guess he has some crappy moments in SM3).

I believe a lot of that has to do with how well conceived the character of Spider Man is - if you portray him in a way that's relatively faithful to the original comic book character (the super-powered geek) then you can't go too far wrong ( ASM 2 is not a good film, but Spidey himself is pretty good).

I have a good feeling about Holland's Spider Man (although I was totally wrong with every prediction I made last year about cbms) I do feel that he brings something special to the role.

I still do think a comparison can be made, despite the comics having much more history. For some folks it might simply the nature of the different
media; that they find the comics drag on and (these days) have unnecessarily convoluted storylines or maybe just don't enjoy reading - some folks might prefer film as a storytelling medium, so in that sense I guess it's less about Marvel comics vs MCU and more about the virtues of cinema vs print/artwork.

However you want to look at it, I think the poll indicates that at least for Captain America and Iron Man, it looks like people prefer the MCU versions.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I do like Ruffalo, but they've really be unable to "crack" who the comic book Bruce Banner/Hulk are.

 

[Batmannerism]

I do like Ruffalo, but they've really be unable to "crack" who the comic book Bruce Banner/Hulk are.

That's a very fair comment. Personally, I preferred Norton as Banner, but Ruffalo isn't bad. I just feel Norton does the suppressed rage of Banner better, probably because he's so nuts.

 

[2kt09]

I'll go by the few I can reference and break this up by directors (I'm insinuating the movie writers involved as well) & comic writers.

Captain America
I only really know of Cap as that WW2 propaganda, so
Russos' Cap ~ Johnston's Cap > Mark Millar's > Whedon's

Iron Man
Ellis's Iron Man > Favreau's > Russos' > Black's > Whedon's
As soon as I finished Extremis some time before The Avengers I just couldn't see Tony Stark firing quips so often. I like how the Russos manage to tweak the character since the last 2-3 attempts, but he needs a bit more tweaking.

Hulk
Peter David's Hulk ~ Leterrier's > Whedon's
Even with the more polished CGI, he lost his horror movie touch and his characterization is all over the place as if to say his screentime is so limited that Whedon has to squeeze out so much before his next appearance. He's currently back to being chummy. Wonder if Waititi is retconning that aspect of his Team Thor.

Spider-Man
The Russos certainly did the best they could, but man is he reminding me more of the animated USM rather than Bendis's.

Ant-Man
Reed clearly avoided much of Pym's dark side, which I hilariously uncovered from some Ultimates issue. So, just on that single comic MCU Pym is obviously the better. The only reason I know of Lang as Ant-Man is because he was on EMH...and since EMH is supposedly directly adapting issues of comics (preface EMH as still pinnacle Avengers), I'd say:
Russos' Ant-Man > Reed's (by an insanely wide margin)
Even if he's now more like adult Peter Parker, I much prefer that to the same ol' default Paul Rudd schtick.

GOTG
08' GOTG > Gunn's
Now we get to the really scornful stuff. Groot, Rocket, and Nebula are perfect, though.
I get the easier to grasp ragtag group of bounty hunters which is a thing for some space operas, but man...is Starlord so childish, Drax so dumb, and Gamora so much of a generic token butt-kicking love interest. Likely parodies, but they just don't resonate as being funny. If only Garth Jennings or Don Coscarelli adapted them.

The rest I'm basing off EMH or the animated movies:
Thor
Goofy or not: both the best MCU performance and writing of Thor was courtesy of Waititi. Then comes Branagh's, then comes Whedon's, and finally Taylor's.

Loki
Everything except Whedon's is just right.

Black Widow
Russos' > Favreau's > Whedon's

Hawkeye
Whedon's (AoU) > Russos' > Branagh's
Not much of a headstrong loose-cannon, but seems ok for the most part

Dr Strange
The effects are great, but...umm...not a noteworthy character setting him apart from everything else

Black Panther
nailed it

Scarlet Witch
Russos' > Whedon's

Quicksilver
lol no, even if he is more "accurate"

Ultron
pass

Vision
makes it look so easy (nailed it)

Winter Soldier
nailed it

War Machine
IM1 > all

Falcon
Too much of a black sidekick, atm, but he's been portrayed well enough

 

[Batmannerism]

:
Thor
Goofy or not: both the best MCU performance and writing of Thor was courtesy of Waititi. Then comes Branagh's, then comes Whedon's, and finally Taylor's.

Dude, what are you basing that on ? Is it just the "What Thor was doing during Civil War" clip, which was hilarious btw.

Up to you of course, but that seems very little to compare performances on - although having said that, I actually prefer Tom Holland's Spidey to both Maguire and Garfield, so who am I to judge ?

It's interesting that in the comics Thor doesn't seem to be a character who lends himself easily to humour - but in the movies he certainly does, possibly that's why I enjoy the MCU character more. In comparison, Loki has a sarcastic wit in both the comics and the films.

 

[2kt09]

Dude, what are you basing that on ? Is it just the "What Thor was doing during Civil War" clip, which was hilarious btw.

Up to you of course, but that seems very little to compare performances on - although having said that, I actually prefer Tom Holland's Spidey to both Maguire and Garfield, so who am I to judge ?

It's interesting that in the comics Thor doesn't seem to be a character who lends himself easily to humour - but in the movies he certainly does, possibly that's why I enjoy the MCU character more. In comparison, Loki has a sarcastic wit in both the comics and the films.

Team Thor and DS's mid-credits scene.
I stated that from Thor and beyond, my knowledge of the characters are limited to various animated incarnations (EMH still being the best). Outside of Super Hero Squad, he's fairly solemn and while still a fish out of a water, he's not so often played for laughs because of that. I guess because they went for the younger God of Thunder, but even then the writing nor the performance has been at the point where I'd enjoy it like his SHS incarnation, until Waititi came along and injected some genuine life into the character. The mid-credits scene from Dr Strange reassured me that Waititi can still take the character more seriously whilst keeping the subtle yet funny quirks.

Loki's perfect. Just continue to keep Whedon away from adapting him.

I don't prefer Holland to Maguire or Garfield, which could hopefully change with Homecoming. I doubt it.

 

[Panacea]

Team Thor isn't canon though, and for me the mid-credits scene is the worst Thor portrayal I've seen by far.

 

[Batmannerism]

Team Thor and DS's mid-credits scene.
I stated that from Thor and beyond, my knowledge of the characters are limited to various animated incarnations (EMH still being the best). Outside of Super Hero Squad, he's fairly solemn and while still a fish out of a water, he's not so often played for laughs because of that. I guess because they went for the younger God of Thunder, but even then the writing nor the performance has been at the point where I'd enjoy it like his SHS incarnation, until Waititi came along and injected some genuine life into the character. The mid-credits scene from Dr Strange reassured me that Waititi can still take the character more seriously whilst keeping the subtle yet funny quirks.

Loki's perfect. Just continue to keep Whedon away from adapting him.

I don't prefer Holland to Maguire or Garfield, which could hopefully change with Homecoming. I doubt it.

To be honest, I think a grim, deadly serious Thor would have fallen flat, or at least felt very out of place in the MCU, which seems to maintain its sense of humour even in the context of genocide (e.g. the ending of GOTG).

Personally, I'm not sure that Taika Waititi is the right guy for a big budget, special effects heavy superhero movie - although I' m saying that very quietly, as he's literally a New Zealand hero.

While his films have been very entertaining, they also play to something unique and intrinsic to NZ culture (particularly Boy and Wilderpeople). But hey, who knows. I thought Scott Derrickson would suck rocks, as the director of Dr Strange, and was very happy to be utterly wrong.

Of course Taika's got a bunch of anitpodeans to work with (Hemsworth, Blanchett and Urban) in this movie, so no doubt that will work - and let's face it Hiddleston and Hopkins only have to show up to be terrific in their respective roles.

Will Taika's humour be a bit too zany, even for MCU Thor ? Guess we'll wait and see.

On a related note, unlike many, I quite liked Thor TDW. I thought it had some weaknesses, but was a lot of fun.