Why dont directors and writers listen to fanboys, or no fanboys in hollywood

[tomorrel]

seriously why is it that hollywood bigshot always wanna "put their own spin" on already successful comic franchises and chang it into often campy, cliche, and bizzare film, interpretations.

 

[wellsy]

Try this - fanboys and girls want *their* interpretation of the character (which in some cases is as simplistic as just a fight movie... and anyone who has seen FF7:AC knows how bad that can be).

Directors, as long as they do sufficient research and treat the character with respect, deserve to give the fanboys the flick. Batman Begins anyone?

 

[Movies205]

Because fanboys have no ****ing clue how to make a movie evne though they think they do because they've seen a lot of movies, that's why

 

[tomorrel]

i think its reasonable to assume that neither of the people whom responded are fanboys

 

[The Chris]

Because their film has to be acceptable for a general audience, which I think is more important than making fanboys happy.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

seriously why is it that hollywood bigshot always wanna "put their own spin" on already successful comic franchises and chang it into often campy, cliche, and bizzare film, interpretations.

'cuz it's what they do for a living and consulting with sit-at-home weiner fanboys isn't a part of their job description.

 

[Steve the Dude]

Because Hollywood is a business that uses Bizzaro Accounting and is only concered with making a profit; not artistic value.

 

[slave2catwoman]

Fanboys don't need to know how to make a movie to know that it is not necessary to make fundamental changes to a character's origin or appearance. Also, fanboy or casual viewer can recognize lazy script writing.
Hollywood types have a snobby, elitist attitude. They think that they are smarter than the people who created and maintained these characters for generations. Their egos make them put their "spins" and "interpretations" on characters that do not need either.
I have always considered comic books movies on paper. It's all pretty much on the page. All you have to do is transfer it to three dimensions.

 

[The Chris]

Who the hell would want to direct a remake or an adaption and have it be exactly like the original. You make movies to express YOUR vision, not someone else's.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I have always considered comic books movies on paper. It's all pretty much on the page. All you have to do is transfer it to three dimensions.

It looks easy until you try to do it yourself.

Fanboys don't have to deal with stuff like a 100 million+ dollar budget, or high-priced prissy actors, or running out of time when shooting on location, or any of a bazillion other things that can and do go wrong when filming a movie.

I'm tired of wankers sitting at home, saying "I could do better!" when really, you wouldn't have a prayer because you have no idea what goes into making a movie.

"All you have to do is transfer it into 3 dimensions."

Please.

 

[slave2catwoman]

There have been good superhero movies, mediocre ones, and lousy ones. Just like every other genre of movie. Just because someone is not a director, does not mean he can't recognize a lousy script, acting, and costumes. When I said 'all you have to do...", what I meant was, there is no need to make extra work for yourself when it is not necessary. Look at STM. They stayed very true to the costume, origin, settings, etc. And they wrote a good script. Same for the first Spider-Man. The farther away these Hollywood know it alls get from the source material, the suckier the end product.

 

[jmc]

Really, there's no such thing as a 'comic book movie'. The movies are based off pre-existing stories/characters which, like it or not don't always adapt well to the medium of film. This is the case with adapting anything from another medium into film; TV, books, Broadway, plays, even artwork. It's easy to say a comic story would make a good film, but that's not always the case, in fact it rarely is the case. The directors/writers don't deliberately piss fanboys off by changing characters/story lines, they do it to adapt it well onto screen. They have a job to bring entertainment to movie goer, which like it or not, is a bigger audience they have to cater for than comic book fanboys. To answers the question, no they shouldn't listen to fanboys, and to be honest, it's best they don't.

 

[Rorschach2012]

they just do their own spin on characters

 

[Changeling]

I really don't know why.

 

[slave2catwoman]

Almost any comic book character would translate well to film if you don't screw with the basic concept and you write a good script. When you think of the best comic book character movies, that is what they did. In the worst ones, they changed the look and/or origins and they slapped together a bad cliche' and coincidence heavy script. And those movies have usually been box office flops.
Maybe the directors can't and shouldn't listen to all the comic book geeks, but it might be a good idea to hire just one. He could serve as a BS detector and script/costume flaw pointer-outer. 200 million bucks is a lot of money to spend on a piece of junk that won't make a profit.

 

[Dr. Fate]

Who the hell would want to direct a remake or an adaption and have it be exactly like the original. You make movies to express YOUR vision, not someone else's.

Sometimes filmmakers just go too far with it, and what they put on screen doesn't even resemble the original concept, or just barely resembles it.

Of, in some cases, you get 2004's "Catwoman".

 

[The Chris]

Sometimes filmmakers just go too far with it, and what they put on screen doesn't even resemble the original concept, or just barely resembles it.

Of, in some cases, you get 2004's "Catwoman".

You're right about Catwoman, but in film school I'm being taught that the first person you have to do a movie for is yourself, because your heart won't be in it and it will only feel like a job. The audience is second. When I'm older my dream project is a big superhero film, either my own invention or an adaptation, and trust me if it is an adaption I'll try to be as faithful as possible, but still let it be known that it is MY movie that I'm spending probably one whole year on, if not more.

 

[the_ultimate_evil]

Because fanboys have no ****ing clue how to make a movie evne though they think they do because they've seen a lot of movies, that's why

quoted for the wint:

 

[DarkSuperman]

"Why dont directors and writers listen to fan boys, or no fan boys in hollywood?"

Short Answer? Cause their Freaking Stupid. Opinions are like butt holes, everyone has them and they all stink.

Quite Frankly 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. [FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[blind_fury]

Directors who completely ignored the fanbase/source material make:

Steel, Catwoman, LXG, Batman and Robin, Elektra, Son of Mask, Judge Dredd.

Yeah Hollywood keep ignoring the fans. They just happen to be the people who understand on an atomic level the appeal of the characters and stories. What do they know? It's better to just ignore the the fanboys and make Iron Man with purple gaint horns and nipples.

Who cares what made it popular to begin with?

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Because fanboys have no ****ing clue how to make a movie evne though they think they do because they've seen a lot of movies, that's why

It's even worse than that, it's because they've read a lot of comics.

 

[LuiECuomo]

Kev, check your messages.

 

[dnno1]

You can't have fanboys without writers, and last I checked, there are fanboys (and girls) in hollywood. A lot of them have read the comics when they were kids (ala Bryan Singer, Josh Whedon, Ben Affleck, Rober Downey Jr., Rosario Dawson, Tim Burton, Frank Miller, et. al). Also I think hollywood does listen to fanboys. It's just that not all fanboys can agree on everything.

 

[Cyrusbales]

MOVIES ARE NOT COMICS.

Fanboys are so termed because they of their over the top allegiance to things regardless of quality.

Let a hulk fanboy make a hulk film, all we'd get is HULK SMASH for 3 hours, with no character.

Fanboy's ARE THE WORST people to make comic book films as they are not objective in the slightest.

 

[blind_fury]

Fanboys expect more because we recognize unfulfilled potential. Studios don't care about unfulfilled potential.

They want to keep the masses' standards low so they can make a quick and easy buck.


Imagine seeing this incredibly lush, obviously very expensive footage with this incredible soundtrack. I think no one really knew except maybe Paul, Bruce and Alan what quality they had created and how elevated it was going to be.

This is what Kevin Conroy said recently about the response other studios had to the high quality of Batman TAS:

"I remember I had some friends who were working at Disney and they called when it started airing. All of them kept on saying “You B#!@$S!. Now you’ve raised the standards for everyone. Now we have to match up to it.” The other studios were not happy." - Kevin Conroy

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=117640

hmmm. Maybe we are being intentionally cheated and sold short. Maybe fans have a valid reason to demand better.