I agree on that, definitely. I just think that the best way to show their creations the respect they deserve is to make them relatable to today's audiences, which in many cases they might not be if they remained frozen in time and locked into the versions that existed in the 1960s or whatever.
Just as an example, it would be totally disrespectful if every female character that was adapted to the big screen was clad in bikinis or leotards or whatever they wore in the old comics, because it would look terribly sexist and they'd be accused of objectifying these women.
So obviously, there are many reasons why the old ways can't be adapted to the movies in the 2020s in the same ways that they existed in comic books in the 1960s.
I'm not opposed to updates where it makes sense.
Iron Man (2008) was a perfect example. It wouldn't have made much sense for Tony Stark to be captured by the Viet Cong as he was in his comic origin (unless you set the movie in the 60's). So having him captured by middle eastern terrorists didn't change the story, but made these antagonists topical to the time the movie was made.
In the same way, we can't have Reed & Ben (of the F.F.) referring to their serving in WWII anymore (like they did in comics from the 60's & 70's). If they exist in the modern era and served in WWII, they'd both be 100 years old. So of course updates are necessary if you are going to set stories in current times.
This one's silly, but in the
Daredevil (2003) movie, they have him retire to a sensory deprivation tank after a long night of crime fighting. I have no idea if this concept ever appeared in comics or not, but it was a minor insight into a detail of his private life that made perfect sense! Of course a guy with heightened senses would want a break from all the sensory input, so a deprivation tank was logical, yet it in no way changed the character, only presented a very logical expansion based on what we knew his powers were.
Reply to Topic
