0
Recent attempts at bringing traditionally 2D-rendered characters onto the big screen had been applaudable indeed. From Batman Begins to Sin City, comic book movies are starting to bring to life the characters, the whole mythology in a way that does justice to their predecessors (i.e. the film noir feel to Frank Miller's Sin City; the in-depth exploration into the protagonist's character in Batman Begins). But what if the comic the movie is based on utterly, for the lack of a better term, SUCKS? How then should we judge it?
I have never liked the Hulk comics. Never. In the comic book world of fancy powers, debonair wit and unfalliable utility belts; mysterious origins, haunting pasts and the proverbial closets chock full 'o skeletons - Dr. Bruce Banner falls short in my opinion:
"Ohs Noes! I've been zapped by a Gamma Ray!"
*Cues transformation into muscular green dude*
"RAWRRR! HULK SMASH!"
*Cues transformation back into wussy white dude*
"Why does everyone hate the Hulk for DESTROYING ACRES OF PUBLIC PROPERTY? Oh wait - You're pissing me off!"
*Cues transformation into muscular green dude*
*RAWRRR! HULK SMASH!"
Go figure.
However, a green-giant-loving-friend of mine swears that Hulk is a "good" comic book movie. Who am I to judge his tastes? I still think that the spectacle of a half-dressed, green steroid nightmare jumping around smashing things is ludicrous though.
What about the really good comic book characters whose transition to movies fall short? Specifically, I am talking about Mister "I-Am-Not-The-Bad-Guy" Daredevil who spends much of the movie brutalizing people (with a memorable scene where a thug is allowed to be chopped in half by a train). No proper character development, or scene transitions at all. How the heck did a poor, blind orphan come into the possession of a secret lair of fancy gadgets? Don't get me started on the love-interest bit. Above all, I am still wondering why "YOU KILLED MY FATHER" Electra miraculously became "OHS NOES! I AM SORRY!" Electra the moment she unmasked Daredevil - as if the sudden revelation in identity would instantaneously translate into Daredevil =/= Father Slayer.
Lots of people still like the Daredevil movie though.
How then do we judge what makes the "Best Comic Book Movie"? By its action sequences? (Methinks millions are still wanking over the CGIs in Spidey 2 even as I type) By its faithful renditions of the comic characters/theme/settings in movies? People who do not like steampunk will not enjoy The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. People who do not like film noir and gangster literature will not enjoy Sin City. Heck - some people are still bitching over minor things, like Keanu Reeves's Constantine not being a trenchcoated pom (i.e. Brit) in a gloomy gothic London (while it seems to me that a Yank in a gloomy gothic LA should suffice).
The bottomline?
Bad comics do not equate bad movies.
Good comics do not equate good movies.
And vice versa of course.