When a comic character becomes sufficiently popular and has been in existence for many years, very often, some readers may wish to see alternate interpretations of that character, and the artists may, indeed, provide such interpretations.
For example, Marvel once printed a series called Marvel 1602, which featured many of their famous characters in colonial America during the year 1602, and DC once printed a Batman comic set in Victorian England, including some elements of both steampunk and gothic horror. As far I as know, both of these alternate interpretations were well-received.
Also, as time has passed, some characters have become different in how they have been portrayed: for example, both Reed Richards and Hank Pym once had a rather unpleasant habit of being abusive toward their wives, but I am certain that such misogynistic tendencies are no longer present in newer media.
Recently, many viewers complained about the different portrayals of Deadpool in X-Men Origins: Wolverine and the Mandarin in Iron Man 3, but I find myself wondering why they are complaining. The characters in those films certainly were different from how they are normally portrayed, but the writers of the comics are frequently re-interpreting their characters, so those portrayals were nothing new. Those complaints are especially weird for me when I notice that very few people complained about Jasper Sitwell and John Garrett being members of Hydra in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, when both are loyal agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. in the original comics. Another example would be that people who saw the 1998 Godzilla film were very displeased with the portrayal of the titular creature, but that Godzilla was lithe, agile, and actually biologically-probable (notice that I did not say realistic, but simply probable), yet most people were pleased with the slow and ponderous Godzilla in the 2014 film; why would any prefer a slow and ponderous monster over a lithe and agile one?
Overall, I find it to be annoying when fans expect the characters in the films to look and act exactly the same as their counterparts in the comics, because live-action films and comics are two different mediums; colorful or campy characters may work in comics, but they rarely work in live-action films (the fact that Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy is often held in higher regard by most fans than is Joel Schumacher's Batman and Robin is an excellent example of this), and for that reason, I do not expect Deadpool's sense of humor and fourth-wall breaking to translate well from his comics to his upcoming live-action film, but I still shall see it, because one of my friends is major fan of Deadpool, and is certain to invite me to see it with him.
What does everyone else say about this? Is there anything wrong with having an alternate interpretation of a famous and iconic character, and do you believe that it is ridiculous when fans complain about such alternate portrayals?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Those who would trade their freedoms for security will have neither.”-Benjamin Franklin
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
Does anyone have any input on this subject? I started this thread on another forum, and none of the users there contributed to it in any meaningful way; they all treated it as if it were a joke and insulted me in the process, so I really would like to see the users here actually participate in this thread. This is a subject that I very much wish to discuss, so please respond and help to make this discussion an active one.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Those who would trade their freedoms for security will have neither.”-Benjamin Franklin
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For example, Marvel once printed a series called Marvel 1602, which featured many of their famous characters in colonial America during the year 1602, and DC once printed a Batman comic set in Victorian England, including some elements of both steampunk and gothic horror. As far I as know, both of these alternate interpretations were well-received.
Also, as time has passed, some characters have become different in how they have been portrayed: for example, both Reed Richards and Hank Pym once had a rather unpleasant habit of being abusive toward their wives, but I am certain that such misogynistic tendencies are no longer present in newer media.
Recently, many viewers complained about the different portrayals of Deadpool in X-Men Origins: Wolverine and the Mandarin in Iron Man 3, but I find myself wondering why they are complaining. The characters in those films certainly were different from how they are normally portrayed, but the writers of the comics are frequently re-interpreting their characters, so those portrayals were nothing new. Those complaints are especially weird for me when I notice that very few people complained about Jasper Sitwell and John Garrett being members of Hydra in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, when both are loyal agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. in the original comics. Another example would be that people who saw the 1998 Godzilla film were very displeased with the portrayal of the titular creature, but that Godzilla was lithe, agile, and actually biologically-probable (notice that I did not say realistic, but simply probable), yet most people were pleased with the slow and ponderous Godzilla in the 2014 film; why would any prefer a slow and ponderous monster over a lithe and agile one?
Overall, I find it to be annoying when fans expect the characters in the films to look and act exactly the same as their counterparts in the comics, because live-action films and comics are two different mediums; colorful or campy characters may work in comics, but they rarely work in live-action films (the fact that Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy is often held in higher regard by most fans than is Joel Schumacher's Batman and Robin is an excellent example of this), and for that reason, I do not expect Deadpool's sense of humor and fourth-wall breaking to translate well from his comics to his upcoming live-action film, but I still shall see it, because one of my friends is major fan of Deadpool, and is certain to invite me to see it with him.
What does everyone else say about this? Is there anything wrong with having an alternate interpretation of a famous and iconic character, and do you believe that it is ridiculous when fans complain about such alternate portrayals?
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt