How much retcon is too much
By
American_Knight,
Posted on: 2011-05-20 22:00 in Comic and Hero-Villain Culture
The thing is, most of the changes present in First Class seem to have been made to fit things in with the established continuity of the previous 3 X-Movies (4 if you count Woverine, which I only do for the first half or so...). So yes, it's a little odd to see Havok as the older, experienced Summers brother, among other changes. But other things I find kinda cool, like the idea of seeing Mystique as an early X-Men member before Magneto breaks away to form the Brotherhood.
I guess Ultimate X-Men has made me a little more conducive to playing fast and loose with X-Men lore in the movies compared to the comics.
There is an art, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. --The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Quote:
I can agree with the LotR. I think the core of the story was still there.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Lord of the Rings: OK.
Starship Troopers: Too much. |
I didn't realize that Starship Troopers was a novel until this post. Just reading the Wiki entry I can see a the difference. Gonna have to go look for the book now.
Champion.
Freedom.
We just coded it on a simple X-currentDate formula, so it nerfs itself automatically. -Babs on Accuracy Nerfs
Over 3 years, 1 - 50, whole lotta alt's, still having fun.
We had a similar discussion at lunch today. We were talking about how the Marvel Movies are borrowing a lot from their Ultimate Line of books. To the purist (aka diehard comic canon person) a lot of the Ultimate stuff is trash and they would rather see the Nightcrawler that was rescue by Xavier from villagers than the Nightcrawler that was used as a weapon against the president to spark a mutant war.
I don't mind them "modernizing" orgin tales to make them more accessable to a wider audience. That, in theory, should mean the movies will became more sucessful and they will make more of them.
I guess the issue is when does "modernizing" result in distorting beyond recognition? Lex Luther as a world conquerer or Lex Luther as wanting oceanside property in Arizona? Pheonix as eating stars and killing billions of aliens, or Pheonix wanting to bump uglies with Wolverine and desintigrating Cyclops?
Quote:
Yah, the age thing bothers me a little, I could get over that, it's not somthing I like but I could see past that. It's his blasts coming out of his chest like he's Chamber or something. I dunno just irks me.|
Originally Posted by Hazmatter
So yes, it's a little odd to see Havok as the older, experienced Summers brother, among other changes. But other things I find kinda cool, like the idea of seeing Mystique as an early X-Men member before Magneto breaks away to form the Brotherhood.
I guess Ultimate X-Men has made me a little more conducive to playing fast and loose with X-Men lore in the movies compared to the comics. |
Mystique is the one that really annoys me the most, Raven is old, over 100, it's part of who she and why she see humanity as she does. Is the Ultimate X-men where she also was shown to be part of the weapons plus program? I thought that was a cool background for her too.
Quote:
| Pheonix as eating stars and killing billions of aliens, or Pheonix wanting to bump uglies with Wolverine and desintigrating Cyclops? |
Champion.
Freedom.
We just coded it on a simple X-currentDate formula, so it nerfs itself automatically. -Babs on Accuracy Nerfs
Over 3 years, 1 - 50, whole lotta alt's, still having fun.
Quote:
/this.
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Lord of the Rings: OK.
Starship Troopers: Too much. |
Quote:
Starship Troopers was a deliberate satire of the novel.
|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Lord of the Rings: OK.
Starship Troopers: Too much. |
Quote:
The first Starship Troopers movie is enjoyable enough if you don't have the knowledge of the books there (the Skinnies, the power armor, etc). Doesn't hurt that one of my friends from college was an extra in it. |
Originally Posted by Patchwork_Knight
I can agree with the LotR. I think the core of the story was still there.
I didn't realize that Starship Troopers was a novel until this post. Just reading the Wiki entry I can see a the difference. Gonna have to go look for the book now. |
If you want a more faithful adaptation, look up the Starship Troopers CGI cartoon. Called the Roughneck Chronicles. Quite a neat little show.
Quote:
*cough* |
Originally Posted by Scythus
Starship Troopers was a deliberate satire of the novel.
|
Er... link. For satire, someone has to be aware of the original source. It has to have some relation besides, oh, names. (See Star Wars to Spaceballs, Shaun of the Dead to - well, most zombie movies.)
Quote:
| A report in an American Cinematographer article states that the Heinlein novel was optioned well into the pre-production period of the film, which had a working title of Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine; most of the writing team reportedly were unaware of the novel at the time. According to the DVD commentary, Paul Verhoeven never finished reading the novel, claiming he read through the first few chapters and became both "bored and depressed." |
The best thing that came out of Starship Trooopers?
This. (Read it on Usenet originally. Glad to see it's been put elsewhere for some degree of posterity.)
(Now, for a no-thinking-needed, "ooh, explosions and breasts! But mostly explosions!" movie, it works. For anything related to Starship Troopers, the ingredients on the side of Metamucil would make a closer script. And better "satire.")
Quote:
Here you go: http://www.overthinkingit.com/2009/1...opers-fascism/|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
*cough*
Er... link. For satire, someone has to be aware of the original source. It has to have some relation besides, oh, names. (See Star Wars to Spaceballs, Shaun of the Dead to - well, most zombie movies.) |
Yes, Verhoven publicly admitted that he never finished Heinlein's book because it made him "bored and depressed." Being a survivor of the Third Reich, Verhoven was not enamored by the fascist ideology of the book and pretty much attacked it with his movie, turning into one of the most brilliant anti-war satires I have ever seen on the silver screen. The movie, Starship Troopers, is designed like one of the old Nazi war propaganda films that Verhoven was familiar with from his childhood. It's not serious and the movie very clearly doesn't try to be. Personally as someone who finds war one of the more distasteful creations of mankind, I absolutely loved it (and Starship Troopers 3 for the same reason, 2; however, completely missed the point).
So yeah, it's not like the book because it deliberately tried not to be.
And here's a well-written article about fascism in Heinlein's Starship Troopers.
http://www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah/ftp/fedrlsvc.pdf
So at some point, it becomes clear with these franchise type movies that the writer, director, execs, creative forces that be, care nothing for the existing franchise and merely want to use it's name, and some very basic core concepts to try to cash in on a money making franchise.
See: The Street Fighter Movie... (Almost none of that movie had anything to do with the game, other than names and fighting.)
Or GI Joe Movie. (Snake eyes was a ninja, Scarlett Had red hair, General Hawk was in charge, and the rest they made up as they went along.)
And there are many others involved.
In the case of X-Men, Bryan Singer left X-Men after the second movie. So I think the third movie is when the writers really decided to forget the comics and do as they damn well pleased. I'm fairly certain anything in the 3rd movie or the Wolverine movie that resembled the comics, was a case of the writers having writers block so they shoe horned something in from the comic to get past it then made up some more of their own crap.
The First Class: It looks interesting to me, but since we saw Dr. Mccoy in X-2 without blur fur and all that, then with it in X-3, it seems weird that he's going to have it in this movie, since their own timeline indicates he didn't have that change until later on.
I'm guessing this is a reboot, not a prequel. And I heard a while back that Fox has to crank out an X-men movie every so often, or they lose the rights to make X-men movies and they go back to Marvel, and Fox has decided that cranking out crap movies based incredibly loosely on the property is better than letting Marvel do good movies.
The unfortunate part is, we've seen that if you take a successful property, you treat it with some respect, try to get all the piece of the property that made it successful in the first place, translate them to the Big screen accurately, you can end up with some big hits . Batman Begins, Batman The Dark Knight, and Iron Man 1 and 2, these movies got most of the core concepts and characters right, even if the stories were a little different, they felt like solid translations from comics to big screen and they made a **** ton more money than either X-3 or Wolverine did, or Gi Joe or Street Fighter....
Successful properties are successful for a reason and hollywood could make a lot more money on big screen adaptations if they'd actually work on representing these things faithfully. It's not about re-writing the material, it's about getting good material to a larger audience.
"Where does he get those wonderful toys?" - The Joker
Quote:
Anyone who thinks Starship Troopers is fascist doesn't own a dictionary. Or was awake during history class.
|
Originally Posted by Scythus
And here's a well-written article about fascism in Heinlein's Starship Troopers.
http://www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah/ftp/fedrlsvc.pdf |
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Wrong. Did you even read the article, btw?
|
Originally Posted by Ironik
Anyone who thinks Starship Troopers is fascist doesn't own a dictionary. Or was awake during history class.
|
Quote:
You need someone who is either a huge fan of the original material or someone invested in protecting the IP. Look at how badly the Alien, Predator and Terminator franchises went off the rails.
|
Originally Posted by Ice_Wall
So at some point, it becomes clear with these franchise type movies that the writer, director, execs, creative forces that be, care nothing for the existing franchise and merely want to use it's name, and some very basic core concepts to try to cash in on a money making franchise.
See: The Street Fighter Movie... (Almost none of that movie had anything to do with the game, other than names and fighting.) Or GI Joe Movie. (Snake eyes was a ninja, Scarlett Had red hair, General Hawk was in charge, and the rest they made up as they went along.) And there are many others involved. |
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Yes. He's wrong. Clearly he needs a dictionary, because his definition of fascism bears no relation to reality.|
Originally Posted by Scythus
Wrong. Did you even read the article, btw?
|
He also makes specious side comments like "uniforms are not commonly worn by general government workers." Well, no, not in OUR world, but Heinlein's writing science fiction. It's no different from many other sci-fi tales from Star Trek to, well, name a random dozen. Plus, most jobs may not have uniforms the way soldiers, police, firefighters, EMS, park rangers, doctors, nurses, priests, nuns, restaurants, animal shelters, cable companies, yard maintenance companies... oh yeah, almost every job requires a uniform, and those who don't expressly define "acceptable dress." It's actually rare to find a job that doesn't have some sort of required outfit. Look at IBM when Heinlein was writing, for example.
But clothes don't make the political ideology. He makes a whole host of other selective and incorrect assumptions, sometimes even ignoring human behavior altogether.
One can disagree with Heinlein's idea if you want, that's fine. I disagree with his proposal myself. What you can't do is call it something it isn't. It's not fascism or socialism or communism, it's merely a form of representative democracy that differs from the American version in one important particular: you only get to participate in the franchise if you serve for at least two years, and everyone can serve if they want to.
Since Heinlein was on record for being anti-draft, saying something to the effect that a country whose citizens can't be bothered to volunteer to defend it doesn't deserve to exist, you can see how he got to the society he created in Starship Troopers. Heinlein was wrong about a whole host of things in his life, but if you're going to disagree with this particular version of wrongness, then call it the right thing. It's not fascism.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Back on topic: I honestly don't care about what details they've jiggered around in X-Men: First Class. It looks like they're getting the characters and their conflict and the overall point of the book right.
As opposed to Green Lantern, where they seem to be fundamentally changing Hal Jordan's personality. Ryan Reynolds is a superb actor, but how many of you have seen his serious roles? I'd wager it would be me and maybe one other person.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Then perhaps you should read this, because you're the one who's very wrong.|
Originally Posted by Ironik
Yes. He's wrong. Clearly he needs a dictionary, because his definition of fascism bears no relation to reality.
He also makes specious side comments like "uniforms are not commonly worn by general government workers." Well, no, not in OUR world, but Heinlein's writing science fiction. It's no different from many other sci-fi tales from Star Trek to, well, name a random dozen. Plus, most jobs may not have uniforms the way soldiers, police, firefighters, EMS, park rangers, doctors, nurses, priests, nuns, restaurants, animal shelters, cable companies, yard maintenance companies... oh yeah, almost every job requires a uniform, and those who don't expressly define "acceptable dress." It's actually rare to find a job that doesn't have some sort of required outfit. Look at IBM when Heinlein was writing, for example. But clothes don't make the political ideology. He makes a whole host of other selective and incorrect assumptions, sometimes even ignoring human behavior altogether. One can disagree with Heinlein's idea if you want, that's fine. I disagree with his proposal myself. What you can't do is call it something it isn't. It's not fascism or socialism or communism, it's merely a form of representative democracy that differs from the American version in one important particular: you only get to participate in the franchise if you serve for at least two years, and everyone can serve if they want to. Since Heinlein was on record for being anti-draft, saying something to the effect that a country whose citizens can't be bothered to volunteer to defend it doesn't deserve to exist, you can see how he got to the society he created in Starship Troopers. Heinlein was wrong about a whole host of things in his life, but if you're going to disagree with this particular version of wrongness, then call it the right thing. It's not fascism. |
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/Comments..._troopers.html
As listed, all four requirements for fascist society as stated by Ernst Nolte are present. The Federation is fascist. Furthermore, any sort of society that requires military service for its citizens to vote or participate in government is the furthest thing from free society.
Quote:
Going to have to explain how Fascism equals only allowing people that serve their country to vote. Switzerland has compulsory military service and no one would consider it to be a fascist country. Most healthy males have about 1 year to vote before they have to serve their country. Since the voting age is 18 and the drafting age starts at 19. Therefore, most male Switzerland citizens have served their country before doing much voting. At least Starship Troopers allows people to choose if they want to serve or vote. |
Originally Posted by Scythus
Wrong. Did you even read the article, btw?
|
Also, the article doesn't mention anything about fascism. It just talks about the controversy of voting being earned not freely given. I have to agree with votes being earned since voting should require people to care for their country and military service is an effective way to prove that a person care more for their country than themselves.
The first step in being sane is to admit that you are insane.
Quote:
That is not a free society. And earning the right to vote through service to the state is frankly morally repugnant and disgusting. The government exists to serve the people, not the other way around.
|
Originally Posted by starphoenix
Going to have to explain how Fascism equals only allowing people that serve their country to vote. Switzerland has compulsory military service and no one would consider it to be a fascist country. Most healthy males have about 1 year to vote before they have to serve their country. Since the voting age is 18 and the drafting age starts at 19. Therefore, most male Switzerland citizens have served their country before doing much voting. At least Starship Troopers allows people to choose if they want to serve or vote.
Also, the article doesn't mention anything about fascism. It just talks about the controversy of voting being earned not freely given. I have to agree with votes being earned since voting should require people to care for their country and military service is an effective way to prove that a person care more for their country than themselves. |
Quote:
And yep, we have a threadjack in progress.
|
Originally Posted by Scythus
That is not a free society. And earning the right to vote through service to the state is frankly morally repugnant and disgusting. The government exists to serve the people, not the other way around.
|
Quote:
Still not fascism.|
Originally Posted by Scythus
That is not a free society. And earning the right to vote through service to the state is frankly morally repugnant and disgusting. The government exists to serve the people, not the other way around.
|
Go look for yourself: www.dictionary.com
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Conveniently dodging the other response, I see.
|
Originally Posted by Ironik
|
Quote:
How can you possibly use that as evidence that ST is fascist? I mean come on, the MAIN CHARACTER is Filipino and his love interest is Hispanic and his best friend is, too, while the two major mouthpiece/authority figures are a French-American and a Chinese dude.|
Originally Posted by Scythus
Then perhaps you should read this, because you're the one who's very wrong.
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/Comments..._troopers.html As listed, all four requirements for fascist society as stated by Ernst Nolte are present. The Federation is fascist. Furthermore, any sort of society that requires military service for its citizens to vote or participate in government is the furthest thing from free society. |
Boom, item one eliminated. Item four doesn't really apply. Besides, Heinlein stated he based that society on Switzerland, which isn't what? Fascist.
One can even see that Heinlein was picking up on the incipient -- and now in full swing -- cultural shifts of political correctness and the "everyone gets a ribbon" mentality seen in schools these days. The fact that 95% of kids cheat on major exams nowadays rather proves Heinlein's point about the US and what happened to it.
As I said already, I disagree with Heinlein's assertions. Still doesn't make the book fascist.
Now go read The Forever War by Joe Haldeman as the antidote and let it go.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Oh look, I didn't.|
Originally Posted by Scythus
Conveniently dodging the other response, I see.
|
Just stop, man. ST is full of wrongheadedness, but it is NOT fascist.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
With the new X-men movie coming out I was thinking about all the changes that they (Hollywood, writers, ect.) made to the characters, namely Havok, Mystique, and Beast, and started thinking how much can they change the back stories of the characters before they don't feel like person they are supposed to represent anymore. To me beast is the least changed, though his furry incarnation seems to be a little early, but both Havok and Mystique could have been new characters.
What are your thoughts on the rewriting of characters, are there any that have been taken so far from the source that they you feel they no longer represent the name they hold, or are no longer the character you care about?
Champion.
Freedom.
We just coded it on a simple X-currentDate formula, so it nerfs itself automatically. -Babs on Accuracy Nerfs
Over 3 years, 1 - 50, whole lotta alt's, still having fun.