Avatar image for kevd4wg
#1 Posted by Kevd4wg (2101 posts) - - Show Bio

Do you care if CBM or CBS deviate from the source material be it in power levels, stories, characters, moments, or general differences from the comics. Personally I don’t care. I think that the movies are an adaptation of the comics and that they should be different, but not too different to the point of not being the character at all ie batman being a comedian while one shorting darkseid living in metropolis murdering people.

Avatar image for bflynn316
#2 Posted by bflynn316 (2424 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't care if they make changes as long as they stay true to the heart of the characters.

Avatar image for super_ninja
#3 Posted by Super_ninja (2562 posts) - - Show Bio

Sometimes.

Avatar image for ready_4_madness
#4 Posted by Ready_4_Madness (9356 posts) - - Show Bio

Depends

Online
Avatar image for DeathandGrim2
#5 Posted by DeathandGrim (3764 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm iffy about it. On one hand I'm as anal as they come to source material if said Show or Movie decides it wants to follow that source material as its story.

BVS is a perfect example as it wanted to follow both DOS and TDKR. If you're gonna follow those stories then actually follow the story. I want the story plot points hit and I want similar narrative.

The Avengers however takes inspiration from comic book storylines but all in all goes about it's business and tells it's own tale and could be excused for not getting everything panel perfect.

It's about your intent with me. If you say you want to tightly adapt a project. Go for it and that's what I'm looking for in my criticisms.

Avatar image for buttersdaman000
#6 Posted by buttersdaman000 (20751 posts) - - Show Bio

People only care if they have strong preconceived notations and/or the changes aren't to their liking. Nobody cares that the MCU characters hardly resemble their comic counterparts because the vast majority of the fans didn't feel too strongly about these characters beforehand, and the changes are crafted to be "likable". However, everybody has a pretty singular idea of what Superman should be, even people who have never picked up a comic. Therefore, any interpretation that goes counter to this, and especially one that isn't crafted to be likable, is likely to be negatively received.

Avatar image for gotoucanario
#7 Posted by Gotoucanario (2857 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes but I am not too strict about it, they can take plenty of liberties as long as it feels like the movie is actually trying to adapt the story and not just slapping a name tag on it.

Avatar image for aros001
#8 Posted by Aros001 (2507 posts) - - Show Bio

I think it depends a lot on whether or not the changes made were respectable and understandable.

Bucky and Steve being the same age and best friends in the movies is different from the comics were Bucky was much younger than Steve back in WWII and his sidekick, but the change is overall accepted because the MCU made that change to focus more on the two being friends (plus most sidekicks outside of Batman's are a dying art). The change feels like it was respectful to both characters.

The 2015 Fantastic Four tried to be much darker and more brooding than they are in the comics, to the point where they all wear black suits without even their logo on them and no one is really called by their hero name. The changes it made don't feel respectful because it feels like the movie is ashamed to even be about the Fantastic Four, thus why it's trying to change everything about them.

Avatar image for kingsurtur
#9 Posted by KingSurtur (5 posts) - - Show Bio

Not unless it's to a serious degree.

Avatar image for stellatedcolt
#10 Posted by StellatedColt (472 posts) - - Show Bio

It all depends on how far they take it.

Avatar image for comicman24
#11 Edited by ComicMan24 (147977 posts) - - Show Bio

It depends on the change really. Some changes I believe are inevitable. Not everything is going to translate well on the big screen, so some changes need to be done. And then there are some changes that just make you think "What the hell where they thinking?".

Avatar image for all-father
#12 Posted by All-Father (4912 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't mind but only if they're handled in a good way.

Avatar image for black_wreath
#13 Posted by black_wreath (13388 posts) - - Show Bio

If the source was clearly the better way to go then yes but some changes are undeniably for the best.

Avatar image for prospero_locke
#14 Posted by Prospero_Locke (1072 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't like changes that are not necessary or that don't justify themselves. Like changing a critical part in a story with a scene that takes up as much time as the original point would have taken just irks me beyond all reason. Or when a race or appearance change (of any kind) doesn't really have anything else to go with it at all so its very much an *insert representation here* thing. I agree with what others above me have said though. I can respect changes I don't like if they stay true to the core of the character. Also, I have had a tendency to embrace a change or two that people absolutely loathe because I can buy in to the version or type of character that fits the story they are trying to tell (i.e. EisenLuthor).

Avatar image for kairan1979
#15 Posted by Kairan1979 (23072 posts) - - Show Bio

It depends. Deviating from the source material is one thing, completely destroying the established character is unacceptable (what's the point of giving the name Zemo to the antagonist from Civil War if he has nothing in common with the original Zemo?).

Avatar image for buttersdaman000
#16 Posted by buttersdaman000 (20751 posts) - - Show Bio

It depends. Deviating from the source material is one thing, completely destroying the established character is unacceptable (what's the point of giving the name Zemo to the antagonist from Civil War if he has nothing in common with the original Zemo?).

Yet people still say he was a good adaptation...i'm convinced that most MCU fans on this site don't actually read comics

Avatar image for mutant1230
#17 Posted by Mutant1230 (3277 posts) - - Show Bio

@buttersdaman000: That's completely untrue. The Hulk, Spider-Man, Daredevil, etc, all had large fanbases before the MCU. Yet, they did all of those characters justice even more so than any other adaptation yet. Captain America, Hawkeye and Black Widow are all based off of their ultimate counterparts and are technically from the source material too. The only two characters that seem to be mostly original in terms of personality and behavior are Thor & Iron Man.

I feel like you're just finding reasons to nitpick the MCU and make DC look like a victim. It's never that simple, and this case is no exception.

Avatar image for buttersdaman000
#18 Posted by buttersdaman000 (20751 posts) - - Show Bio

@buttersdaman000: That's completely untrue. The Hulk, Spider-Man, Daredevil, etc, all had large fanbases before the MCU. Yet, they did all of those characters justice even more so than any other adaptation yet. Captain America, Hawkeye and Black Widow are all based off of their ultimate counterparts and are technically from the source material too. The only two characters that seem to be mostly original in terms of personality and behavior are Thor & Iron Man.

I feel like you're just finding reasons to nitpick the MCU and make DC look like a victim. It's never that simple, and this case is no exception.

How exactly am I making DC look like a victim if I didn't even mention them?? You know what is simple? Your thought process. You were really quick to make this a Marvel vs DC thing.

Avatar image for g2_
#19 Posted by g2_ (9178 posts) - - Show Bio

Sometimes.

Avatar image for nfactor1995
#20 Posted by nfactor1995 (12164 posts) - - Show Bio

If it's politically/socially motivated (like changing a character from being white to another race simply for the sake of diversity, then calling those who like the source material and want the movies to be faithful to it racist), then I'm generally against it tbh. Small character changes regarding motivation, powers, relationships, looks etc aren't a big deal so long as they're done well.

Online
Avatar image for legacy6364
#21 Edited by LEGACY6364 (5810 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't care if they make changes as long as they stay true to the heart of the characters.

+1

Avatar image for krleavenger
#22 Posted by KrleAvenger (23308 posts) - - Show Bio

@mutant1230: How is Black Widow based on her Ultimate counterpart? Ultimate Black Widow is a Russian spy who worked for Liberatos and tried to destroy the Ultimates and America and was killed by Hawkeye at the end. She was about to get married with Tony Stark until he found out she was evil, and even had an Iron-man Armor during the second volume of the Ultimates. MCU Widow is nothing like her Ultimate counterpart. She resembles her 616 counterpart way more.

And same goes for Cap to be honest. While his WWII suit and the fact that he had a gun resemble his Ult. counterpart (plus the fact that he was a founding member of the Avengers and was found by SHIELD), his stories, relationships, personality and overall characteristics resemble his 616 counterpart. I mean, in Ultimate Universe, Cap's first girlfriend wasn't even Peggy Carter, and his shield isn't even made of Proto-Adamantium. Bucky wasn't killed and he wasn't his partner, so he never became Winter Soldier. Hell his second girlfriend was Wasp instead of Sharon. Not to mention that Ult. Cap acts more like a typical soldier with bad attitude instead of a guy we used to see in 616 and even MCU for that matter.

Avatar image for ghostodoofus
#23 Posted by Ghostodoofus (1513 posts) - - Show Bio

@kevd4wg: I actually don’t mind if it gives a surprising twist, Liz is The Vulture’s daughter in Spider-Man: Homecoming but in the comics they never met and don’t really know each other at all.

Avatar image for mrmonster
#24 Posted by mrmonster (5756 posts) - - Show Bio

No, not at all.

Avatar image for kanyecosby
#25 Posted by KanyeCosby (1849 posts) - - Show Bio

Depends how much they change it. I didn’t really mind that Hela was the daughter of Odin. I did mind that Doomsday was a cave troll with the dna of Luthor and Zod.

Avatar image for hellsaint
#26 Posted by HellSaint (259 posts) - - Show Bio

Sometimes.
Depends on if its interesting or not

Avatar image for mutant1230
#27 Posted by Mutant1230 (3277 posts) - - Show Bio

@buttersdaman000: However, everybody has a pretty singular idea of what Superman should be, even people who have never picked up a comic. Therefore, any interpretation that goes counter to this, and especially one that isn't crafted to be likable, is likely to be negatively received.

That's literally what you said. You brought up Superman in comparison to Marvel acting as though there's a double standard between how MCU heroes are received compared to DC's. I didn't turn this into a Marvel-DC discussion, you brought it up.

Avatar image for mutant1230
#28 Posted by Mutant1230 (3277 posts) - - Show Bio

@krleavenger: You're preaching to the choir. I was more talking about in terms of powers and costumes compared to actual personalities, which are clearly more in parallel to 616.

When it comes to how they're portrayed in action though Cap definitely borrowed a lot from the Ultimate comics. Having actual super strength and abilities for one and just the overall "badass" way he seems to be shown in the Russo movies. That was never really an aspect of 616 Captain America but was big with the Ultimate interpretation.

Avatar image for buttersdaman000
#29 Posted by buttersdaman000 (20751 posts) - - Show Bio

@buttersdaman000: However, everybody has a pretty singular idea of what Superman should be, even people who have never picked up a comic. Therefore, any interpretation that goes counter to this, and especially one that isn't crafted to be likable, is likely to be negatively received.

That's literally what you said. You brought up Superman in comparison to Marvel acting as though there's a double standard between how MCU heroes are received compared to DC's. I didn't turn this into a Marvel-DC discussion, you brought it up.

Ah, my bad. I thought you were replying to my most recent post.

Anyways, I don't see how what you said invalidated my point. The Hulk has barely had any focus in the MCU beyond being...The Hulk..and his appearance in Thor 3 was relegated to a comedic one. That's not Hulk. If anybody thinks they did Bruce Banner justice simply because they show how much of a burden Hulk is seconds before the next joke, then they're kidding themselves. The MCU did Hulk best when you could feel the loneliness that came with Edward Nortons version. I don't get the same felling with the current guy. He's funny first and foremost which is something that's apparently a requirement for all the main Avengers.

Tom Hollands Spider-Man is just as controversial as the other two. He's not universally appreciated like you seem to suggest.

I don't even count the Netflix shows as part of the MCU.

I didn't read the Ultimate Avengers series so IDK.

I think my point stands, however. You named off a couple characters that kept their comic personalities, but I can name off so many more that didn't. Hulk, for one is something I don't agree with you on. Thor and Iron-Man hardly resemble their comic counterparts. In fact, along with Peter Quill, who just seems like Chris Pratt being himself, the three are pretty interchangeable in personality. Drax is just a buffoon in the MCU, completely unlike his comic version. Ant-Man is just Paul Rudd. I didn't bother with Dr Strange because my friend described the movie as Iron Man with magic. Black Wido is just some chick. Hawkeye is a non-factor. The list goes on.

DC isn't a victim, and I wasn't trying to make them out to be, but it's beyond obvious that it's much, much harder to adapt their characters than it is the Marvel characters.

Avatar image for mutant1230
#30 Posted by Mutant1230 (3277 posts) - - Show Bio

@buttersdaman000: It's fine, but I would like to address a few of your claims about the MCU's adaptation of their characters:

The Hulk has barely had any focus in the MCU beyond being...The Hulk..and his appearance in Thor 3 was relegated to a comedic one. That's not Hulk. If anybody thinks they did Bruce Banner justice simply because they show how much of a burden Hulk is seconds before the next joke, then they're kidding themselves. The MCU did Hulk best when you could feel the loneliness that came with Edward Nortons version. I don't get the same felling with the current guy.

That's not true though, The Avengers heavily focused on Bruce Banner at least in the beginning. Where he was... of course, locked away from society. Even when he was brought into the Helicarrier everyone feared him and he ended up losing control and acting as a menace to anyone who stood in his way. Sure, he had some humor but everyone in Avengers did. Most of it was slapstick when he was in Hulk form and dry sarcastic remarks when he was a scientist, both of those are in-character and make sense for someone like Hulk to do. The loner aspect is touched upon in Age of Ultron when he's shy about seeing Black Widow and leaves in the Quinjet after the Battle of Sokovia. Albeit, I will admit that it executed verywell but an attempt was at least made by Whedon & Marvel.

Tom Hollands Spider-Man is just as controversial as the other two. He's not universally appreciated like you seem to suggest.

Other than maybe some anecdotal experiences, this couldn't be further from the truth. Spider-Man: Homecoming and Tom Holland's character received universal praise from both fans and critics, even in Civil War a ton of people cite him as their favorite part of the movie. The only slight controversy that came up was the original design for his costume but that blew over easily after the trailer was more than a week old. I'm not sure how he's controversial or how he didn't do justice to the character, he captured a lot more of the "traditional" Peter Parker than any of the solo Sony attempts.

I don't even count the Netflix shows as part of the MCU.

I don't know what to tell you, they're part of the MCU. Even if you believe they're non-canon now because of the Perlmutter-Feige split (which isn't not true actually) Daredevil's seasons and masterful characterization was done before any of that drama went down, so I would say Disney-Marvel as a whole can take credit for that series & it's successful characters.

Thor and Iron-Man hardly resemble their comic counterparts. In fact, along with Peter Quill, who just seems like Chris Pratt being himself, the three are pretty interchangeable in personality.

You're using some serious hyperbole here. Thor and Iron Man, while they are different from their comic versions aren't totally different people like you seem to be referring to here. Iron Man still is an a billionaire tech genius with an ego, and Thor is still a boastful warrior prince trying to do right by his father and Asgard. The little details and certain elements have definitely been tweaked but the core aspects are pretty untouched. Star-Lord... I'll give you that he's different. But I'm not saying the Guardians were untouchable, especially since the public didn't even know who they were and needed them to be someone hip and marketable, which is Chris Pratt's specialty.

Avatar image for Penguin-Dust
#31 Posted by PenguinDust (5325 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't care if they make changes as long as they stay true to the heart of the characters.

This, although I am willing to give a little on that if the overall movie is good. I am not one to get wrapped up in the minutia of each character's original personality. The medium of books and comics are different than movies and we will always have the original source material if we're dissatisfied with the film interpretation.

Online
Avatar image for krleavenger
#32 Posted by KrleAvenger (23308 posts) - - Show Bio

@mutant1230:

You're preaching to the choir.

I'm not sure where this hostility is coming from. I just asked a question and explained why I disagree LOL.

I was more talking about in terms of powers and costumes compared to actual personalities, which are clearly more in parallel to 616. When it comes to how they're portrayed in action though Cap definitely borrowed a lot from the Ultimate comics. Having actual super strength and abilities for one and just the overall "badass" way he seems to be shown in the Russo movies. That was never really an aspect of 616 Captain America but was big with the Ultimate interpretation.

Ok, that makes more sense, although I still don't get that Ultimate Black Widow reference. Also it's not like Super Strength isn't a deal for 616 Cap. He has been confirmed to be a super human multiple times, based on statements and feats, and has better feats than his MCU version. Still MCU Cap's badass moments do remind me of Ultimate Cap so fair enough.

Avatar image for wolfrazer
#33 Posted by Wolfrazer (14796 posts) - - Show Bio

I was kinda annoyed with the greatly changed Peter Quill initially. But now I’m indifferent.

Avatar image for farkam
#34 Posted by Farkam (10576 posts) - - Show Bio

Depends.

Avatar image for mutant1230
#35 Posted by Mutant1230 (3277 posts) - - Show Bio

@krleavenger: Oh, no! "Preaching to the choir" is an idiom that means I agree with everything you're saying. It's essentially the act of preaching to someone who makes a living off doing it. I.E. I've said multiple times that Cap's portrayal is good/accurate which is exactly what you were telling me before.

If anything it's actually a compliment.

Avatar image for krleavenger
#36 Posted by KrleAvenger (23308 posts) - - Show Bio

@mutant1230: I see. Never heard of that idiom before, so obviously I thought you were talking about something different. Anyway, nice.

Avatar image for stormshadow_x
#37 Posted by StormShadow_X (13577 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't care if its something new and adds something good to the story or the unless the source material is too difficult to transfer to live action.

Avatar image for mutant1230
#38 Posted by Mutant1230 (3277 posts) - - Show Bio

@krleavenger: I will admit... if you haven't heard it before it does kind of sound like an insult.

Avatar image for lukehero
#39 Posted by lukehero (34572 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't care if they make changes as long as they stay true to the heart of the characters.

Avatar image for lukehero
#40 Posted by lukehero (34572 posts) - - Show Bio

As long as they are in service to the story and not just cause it's cool or trendy type moves then I'm cool with it. Like don't make a character gay or black just to fill a quota. If you make the change it has to be in service to what you're trying to do and the story you are trying to tell.

Avatar image for krleavenger
#41 Posted by KrleAvenger (23308 posts) - - Show Bio

@mutant1230: That is why I thought you were hostile when you said it. Didn't realize it was actually a compliment. Haha.

Avatar image for darkpsychiclord_prime
#42 Posted by DarkPsychicLord_Prime (672 posts) - - Show Bio

I would have wanted to see a proper Planet Hulk and World War Hulk movies, i guess that in a perfect world it would have been possible.

Avatar image for giantmansolos
#43 Posted by giantmansolos (154 posts) - - Show Bio

only thing i dont like is when they try and slam an 'epic' storyline into a 2 hour movie (or more accurately, into the second half of a 2 hour movie). xmen 3's version of the dark phoenix comes to mind.

thanos/infinte gauntlet story is an example of doing it about as well as they could in a movie universe. we see him a few times in various movies, we are introduced to the gems, we see that he is involved with and/or behind some of the events going on in various movies, all to culminate in a two part infinite war movie.

Avatar image for guru_crack
#44 Posted by Guru_Crack (10347 posts) - - Show Bio

Honestly to me they can change whatever they want imo. Try and stay true to the characters and that's it imo. No point putting Deadshot in a film where he doesn't feel like Deadshot (yes Will Smith I am taking shot at you despite you being one of my favourite actors)