Thump
Well-Known Member
Just my two cents but If you are a media entertainment company and you have 40, 50, 60 and in some cases 70 years worth of source material to work with why would you let a movie/a few movies influence the source material that is responsible for the movie to begin with? Tweaking and updating some of the out dated elements in some instances should be the only thing that's needed because clearly something is being or rather has been done right for characters to still be around for that long. Especially comic book characters.
The only comic movie character interpretation that was hands down better than the actual comic book version source material IMO was Blade and that's only because Blade was a second string character in the comics and definitely need a fresh and major interpretation on the big screen compared to the comic book take.
Money, the companies who make these movies and shows only care about getting as much of those "mainstream" dollars as they can.
Some tweaking that I don't think I'm going to like, is what Ive seen of the upcoming Superman movie. Hollywood types always think they need to make everything "gritty" or "dark", but that's not who Superman is. Superman is the epitome of a Boyscout. You just know some executive at Warner Brothers, said "Fuck character authenticity! Dark Knight made us a shit ton of money, we need to copy it as much as possible".