Layers of forgivibility

Or: the laws of supension of disbelief.

There is a line that exists, that I'm not even sure most know exist. What can happen in comics, vs what can happen in animated features, vs what can happen in live action film.

For example- If you made many comics, particuarly some of our most 'beloved' origin stories and comic history moments, directly translated from book to live-action, most folks would boo it off the stage, comment on how rediculous it was, and wonder how anyone could have concieved of anything so stupid.

However, with a tweak here or there, folks would say it was a 'well done' animated movie.

I think we, as a comic book/sci-fi culture need to acknowledge this as we move forward into the next generation of movies and television. Failing to do so will at worst bring about an end to seeing the things we've wanted to see for decades, at best confusion in the general Hollywood market, boiling down to them going to attract the lowest common denominator because the geek culture is impossible to please.

The Fantastic Four movie wasn't bad. There. I said it.

In fact, compared to the original source material and the desire to keep pure Sci-Fi vs trying to explain magic when they're already asking folks to buy the concept of 'cosmic energy' for Dr Doom, they did a pretty damn good job.

Reading the original comic, Reed Richards was an egomaniac who stole government property, and put innocent people in jeapordy- including a minor (for no good reason other than why the hell not) to prove he was right to a government who didn't care if he was right or not- they just didn't want to put any more money into his project in lieu of other things. Then in the next comic they fought a guy who took over an underground kingdom and hated the surface world because he was ugly, so he'd show them!!

Yeah, Oscar material...

Now, I've heard lots of praise for Green Lantern: First Flight. I, too, think it's a great animated movie and love it for what it is. However, I guarantee if they made that as a live action film, folks would tear it apart and think it terrible (some already think the live action one they did was bad- this would have been worse). Folks would have noticed a lot of plot holes and dropped issues that we just DON'T when viewing an animated film, less when it's a comic. I posit that we fill in those gaps with our imagination, yet each iteration; from comic to animated show, to live action, we allow less and less of that incongruity to exist, to where something we would readily accept in a comic book, we burn at the stake in live action.

The catch, of couse, is that we want to see our comic fantasies brought to life... There's the paradox, and our hell.

What do you all think?

Or they could just go with the tried and true idiom of never listen to Parent Groups and Fanboys when translating comics to film, they're always wrong...always.

As long as they stay true to nature of the books and tell a good, cohesive and entertaining story, all's good with me.

A prime example, X-Men: First Class did not follow any comic book or animated show whatsoever, but it stated true to the nature of the books and told a good, cohesive and entertaining story. Same with any of the Nolan Batmans, nor did Thor or Iron Man really, neither did Spider-Man 2, and I could go on.

The problem with Green Lantern was it didn't really stay true to nature of the Green Lantern books, and though the story was entertaining in parts, it was neither good or cohesive.

The first rule of making a good comic book movie is: make a good movie.

The second rule is: read the comic, feel the cool, translate that.

Adapt. Do not reimagine. Do not make it something else. Do not dumb it down. Do not parody. Do not deconstruct.

Third: be epic.

The first X-Men movie? Do that. It was not enslaved to canon, and it utilized the themes of the X-Men and the cool characters and powers to tell a story about alienation and temptation that still would have been good without fight scenes and black jumpsuits.

Movie continuity is movie continuity. I can forgive that.
But do not ignore the cool parts of the character in the original source in order to tell the story; then it becomes a story about someone else who just happens to be wearing the suit. That cannot be forgiven.

Superman Returns: I have many issues with this story, but even if I forgive Super Stalker and Super Deadbeat Dad and Super Can't tell I'm standing on a Kryptonite Continent and Lex recycled plot Luthor...I am still left with the fact that the movie builds up and then ignores Superman's one weakness. Superman is a powerful guy. However, the one thing he should never be able to do in any continuity is simply pick up a Kryptonite continent and toss it into deep space. One of the main things about him is that he has to get help or think his way around Kryptonite.

I can't even give a metaphorical example to compare this to because this should BE the metaphorical example that continuity faux pas are compated to. Aargh.

I can buy a person in a basic, brightly coloured, spandex-ish outfit battling evil whether it be on a comic page, animation, or live action as long as it's done well. They can break the laws of physics if they want. They can use devices that can't possibly exist, and which are described as doing things that scientifically make no sense. I can accept any of that without batting an eye.

But drastically altering a character's aesthetic when translating it from page to screen? That's more likely to take me out of the story.

They change costumes when making the movie version because spandex simply does not work for live-action. It looks cool in hand-drawn content because you can make the fabric and the underlying body structure match each other perfectly. But in real life, that. Is. Impossible.

There's a very tiny fraction of the human race that actually looks good in spandex, and most of them will never cross paths with a movie crew. Pretty much anyone who's not in that tiny fraction looks utterly ridiculous.

Cast actors/actresses that actually fit the role, not because their name will draw people in.

My issue with Movie!Doom in the first one was primarily the voice. This is the template for Darth Vader, people <citation needed> and should have sounded grand and impressive with a hint of Romanian accent, and probably some electronic distortion. Not 'boring standard movie villain'. That was actually the one and only aspect of that movie I found 'unforgivable'.

I've adopted an ideology to deal with the issue of suspension of disbelief. Basically, when it is being challenged, I just pretend the media I am consuming is taking place in some sort of weird, parallel dimension where all my characters are insane people. Then I'm able to enjoy whatever I'm doing, and not complain about how it's not sticking to established lore.

It works for me, at any rate.