Comic book movies -- the other discussion

[newman]

So, over in his LJ my friend Justin raised the question "What comic book(s) do you think would make a good movie? Feel free to assume that it's a competent adaptation, not a hatchet job, but assume that it has to fit into the usual constraints of a movie: about two hours, and has to be able to make enough money to be worth its budget".

In terms of adaptations, novels often make poor source material for films. Even a long movie has trouble fitting in all of the elements that make a novel appealing. Short stories and novellas work pretty well, as do plays, which are already about move-length. Comic books are often serialized novels, taking months or years of issues to complete a story arc. While individual issues (or short collections of issues) might make good films, there are some that just shouldn't be done — either because of reasons of length, or because a good comic book is more than just a storyboard.

Wanted is a prime example of this. It was a fine movie, but it had nothing to do with the comic book. The comic book was a dark, loving, homage to the two great houses in the comic book world, and, if it had been translated to screen accurately, most of America would have said "huh?". Better to have left it on the comic book page — or do what they did, which is the equivalent of never having attempted an adaptation.

There's been a great interest in a Sandman movie or a Watchman movie. I'd happily pass a law declaring these sources off-limits to Hollywood. The adaptation isn't going to to do the inspiration justice.

What comics are simply better as comic books? What comics don't want to be adapted to the big screen? Most of the ones I can think of are comics about comics (Wanted, for example -- but I can think of others). Thoughts?

Comments

[new-man.livejournal.com]

The thing is, comics are an inherently serial narrative

Agreed -- but not not an "unbounded" serial narrative. There are plenty of finite comic book series. Wanted, for example, and Watchmen.

So we end up with "the origin story", which is essentially what every superhero movie is about to date

I can think of several counter-examples, just few off them mainstream comics. One of the things I loved about The Incredible Hulk is that the origin was recapped during the credits. If you were going to see The Hulk, you knew the origin already — or enough of it.

The Incredibles and Mystery Men are neither sequels nor origin stories, but you're right -- for the most part superhero movies show the origin.

[peregrinning.livejournal.com]

Hm. I think the Incredibles makes a good origin story... for Dash, Violet, the family as a whole, and Syndrome. You're right, though, that it doesn't provide the origin stories of Mr. Incredible, Elastigirl, or Frozone.

And isn't Mystery Men the origin story for their group? If memory serves, the team forms as part of the movie.

I think most successful sequels are origin stories - for their villains. Doc Ock in Spider-Man 2, the Joker and [elided] in The Dark Knight. The hero takes a back seat to the story arc of the bad guy. Alas, with movies, the main way to handle this is to kill the bad guy at the end.

[new-man.livejournal.com]

Both Mystery Men and The Incredibles tell the story of a point of transformation for the main characters, but neither gives the origins of the characters or their powers (Dash and Violet were born with theirs, so it's a bit of a cheat).

[brush-rat.livejournal.com]

with the exception of the title character, Hellboy and it's sequel mostly skipped past the origins.

[jducoeur]

True -- but it should be noted, so did the comics. I mean, we're only getting to Abe's origin now, after how many years?

Spiderman II

[cristovau.livejournal.com]

This is sometimes considered better than the first, which was Spiderman's origin story. I won't get into that, but I think what worked in the sequel was the origin or _one_ good villain. The origin story doesn't have to be the heroes.

Re: Spiderman II

[new-man.livejournal.com]

I think a good, compelling story — and this goes far beyond the superhero genre — shows a major change in at least one of the characters. In the superhero genre, the obvious point of change is the origin -- but there can be other points.

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

Ah! Incredibles, Mystery Men -- two excellent examples.

Though perhaps "Incredibles" *is* an origin story -- of the Fightin' Team. Ditto "Mystery Men". This may be why I'm having trouble refuting siderea's recent comment that superhero fiction is the fiction of identity... it seems to fit, and so many superhero movies are about 'becoming'. Or maybe that's just what movies in general are about.

(Haven't seen Hulk; it's on my short list for the coming weeks. I presume you're talking about the new one.)

As for bounded comics -- you're quite right, of course. But _Wanted_ doesn't work without the weight of the entire DC and Marvel universes behind it, any more than _1602_ would. Things like, say, Squadron Supreme (a miniseries I rather liked when it came out) probably wouldn't work...but perhaps. Again with needing a large universe needed to riff against.

Sandman *can* stand independent of its DC roots, and for that reason I was just thinking yesterday that volume 1 (alone) would be a decent movie, or perhaps 4-part miniseries, with appropriate trimming. It might become simply "An old god descends into Hell to reclaim his power", which is a grievous shortening, but it could work.

Watchmen...well, that's another case. Part of why it works because it's a Faberge egg, with intricate interwoven plots at many levels, and short of having an online movie which is part of a greater online presence (a la I Love Bees, perhaps) I can't see it working in a movie-ish medium. Heck, I could see it being a media event with a "War of the Worlds"-level broadcast for the Big Secret.

[new-man.livejournal.com]

Though perhaps "Incredibles" *is* an origin story -- of the Fightin' Team. Ditto "Mystery Men".

I'm having parallel conversations here. As I said to Peregrinning and Cristovau in seperate comments, both Mystery Men and The Incredibles tell the story of a point of transformation for the main characters, but neither gives the origins of the characters or their powers (Dash and Violet were born with theirs, so it's a bit of a cheat). I think a good, compelling story — and this goes far beyond the superhero genre — shows a major change in at least one of the characters. In the superhero genre, the obvious point of change is the origin -- but there can be other points.

[peregrinning.livejournal.com]

New_man, your separation of origin and point of transformation is a good one. I think "point of transformation" is a good way of describing what happens in the Incredibles and Mystery Men: it isn't about how people got their powers, it is about the change when they become a team, or get permission to start using their powers, etc.

Digression

[alexx-kay.livejournal.com]

Part of Watchmen's appeal, to me, is the way in which it serves as a example of dozens of narrative tricks that can only be done in the comics medium. It's extremely formalist and daring in that regard. Obviously, this aspect could never translate to another medium. OTOH, my love for this aspect is hardly typical; most potential movie-goers wouldn't even understand what I was talking about.

Re: Digression

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

...which brings to mind another comic that shouldn't be adapted: Promethea. While you could pull the storyline out, doing any of the tricks that are done in the later books on the Big Screen would be...meaningless.