Red flag in MCU if you hold to the comics

[Andrew NDB]

Well, according to this:

https://boundingintocomics.com/2022/...f-the-culture/

[Leo656]

This is news? Source material has been anathema for the creators of comic book movies for as long as comic book movies have existed.

Aside from some costume choices and Easter Eggs the MCU stuff has only had a superficial resemblance to anything from the comics since some of Phase One or whatever, anyway. That's a big part of why I stopped watching them after a while, that and the constant terrible humor. The ones I did like were the earliest ones, which were not surprisingly the ones that bore the most resemblance to the comics. They went way off the rails very quickly, though, and that's when I started to not care at all.

Not a huge Linkara guy, but his stated feelings on comic books being adapted into other media always rang true with me. To paraphrase: "I like comic book characters and stories for specific reasons; why would I care about a movie or a cartoon show or whatever that completely 'reimagines' those stories and characters until they don't even resemble the thing I loved in the first place? Because they happen to share a name, but almost nothing else?
I'd rather just read those stories again than see them (mis)translated." Now, he claims to not watch or care about almost any ancillary media based on comics, whereas I obviously do, but I completely understand how he feels and to some degree I do feel the same way. If "We purposely do not want this thing based on a comic book to be like the comic book" is the mission statement, I always question why they even bother.

“The tone of Ragnarok is all Taika because he wasn’t married to Thor on the page,” concluded the producer, believing himself to be complimenting the director rather than hitting the nail on the head as to why many fans have been turned off by Waititi’s take on the God of Thunder. “I haven’t read every Thor book, I have read a lot – I couldn’t tell you of a run that is tonally anything like Ragnarok.”

Like, this is the thing. Ready? Here. Here's what I hear in my head when I see stuff like that.
"So like, I always loved the idea of Sherlock Holmes. But THEN I thought 'Well, what if we 'tweaked' it so more people could get into it? Like, what if he smoked crack and flew around on a jetpack, and his sidekick was a talking dog named Watson who actually did all the work and solved all the mysteries? Wouldn't THAT be an awesome movie? So that's what we did for Sherlock Holmes, to bring it to a wider audience!"

Well then it wouldn't be "Sherlock Holmes" no matter what you called it. It'd just be some dumb bullsh*t you made up and stuck a famous name onto for cheap heat. It'd sell tickets, some people would get a kick out of it, sure. But it would absolutely be an insult to the authentic character and anyone who's a sincere fan of it.

[neatoman]

I'm not really surprised either, extremely loose adaptations have been the norm since... Well, since always. I can't think of any live-action adaptation of Marvel or DC comics which use the core plot of any specific story line aside from Watchmen, but that's in the realm of "Not in the Universe" and still feature a lot of detail changes. The closest I can think of is stuff like the Raimi Spider-Man, which takes the origin story and glues some memorable moments after onto it in a new plot, which is still far looser than it needs to be.

Sure, some aspects need to be simplified because there is no way you can adapt every single story line for a series of movies, but that shouldn't be an excuse for just making something up. Is it probably for the best to not adapt every detail of Planet Hulk, the lead-up and aftermath of it? Sure, that would be too complex, especially considering there might not be a clear line where the lead-up starts and the aftermath ends. Was it necessary to just have Hulk go into space voluntarily in an airplane (which at the time indicated he was just going into hiding on earth), completely change the lore of Sakaar, only use the Gladiator part, insert it into the middle of a Thor story (which has it's own baggage) and remove Caiera who was the most important character aside from Hulk himself? No, absolutely not, it wasn't even remotely necessary or even a good idea. Especially not when they decided to introduce Skaar later on even though they ignored Caiera entirely, thus making his existence even more stupid than it was in the comics.n If they planned on using Skaar, then at the very least they should have included Caiera.

Though I'm not sure all these pointless changes are motivated purely by ignorance or disinterest in the source material. As an example, the MCU version of Namor is obviously quite different from the comics version but I can think of at least three reasons why he would be aside from someone just not caring:

1. The whole "anti-colonialism" angle from the first Black Panther was part of why it gained praised, so it's understandable if they wanted to continue that with the second one.
2. Comic book Namor might pre-date Aquaman but they are very similar and Aquaman is more well known, so making drastic changes to Namor might have been deemed a good idea to avoid the comparison.
3. Namor is bound for the public domain in a mere decade, so making drastic changes to him for the movie will prevent people from just copying the movie version in case it becomes popular.

Are any of these changes necessary just because I can think of several reasons though? No, they're not. The first isn't necessary because Namor doesn't need to be Killmonger 2.0 in order to be compelling. The second one might result in some annoying tweets but that's hardly important in the long run. The third is understandable from the point of view of execs but it still won't prevent Namor from falling into the public domain, it will just means any random person can make him an Indigenous Mexican for their own projects, nor does it make for a better story.

The third reason is also why I suspect why they have been so focused on using characters and """adapting""" stories from the past two decades despite the wellspring of decades worth of stories and characters. Why use stuff that will begin to drip feed into the public domain in ten years and continue for the next 30 years after that, when could just use the stuff that will remain in your full control for the next 70-90 years? I know it might sound silly to be worried about something that won't be a problem for decades but let's remember here that Captain America has been published pretty consistently for the past 80 years with the only real gap being from the mid-50's until the mid-60's. Being worried that they will no longer have the exclusive rights to the character in a decade, with his stories and supporting characters chipping into the public domain every year afterwards, is a real concern for a company that has been staying afloat by relying on the same few core titles for the past 60-80 years.

[AquaParade]

It’s a balance, in terms of how faithful you want to be.

I used to dream about my favorite comics being adapted to film, but the more time goes on, the more bored I become with the idea. Just sounds like some kind of dull comatose joy.

This stance was probably strengthened by seeing so many hardcore adaptions fall short of the source material. Maybe I can thank the DC animated comicbook adaptions for that.

I guess there are still a few stories I’d like to see adapted as directly as possible, but mostly just stuff that’s incredibly outlandish, like Morrison’s Batman. Something like that would just be so different for film Batman, so there is a curiosity there, also strengthened by the fact that I’m obsessed with Morrison’s writing, so maybe there is some bias there. A little bit of “I don’t want comicbook stories adapted unless it’s the one I choose!”, I admit. But generally speaking, I’d tend go for the fresh concept.

I want these stories to take advantage of the medium they are in and just do their own thing. I love plenty of comicbook adaptions that aren’t grounded in our reality, but I also love to see a comicbook concept anchored down into something that resembles our world, in large part because it does force you to change things and look at them from a new angle.
I just find that stimulating.

That said, there’s always a spirit to maintain, and that’s where the blurry line is.

[Autbot_Benz]

That explains why I hate Love and Blunder so much. Its nothing like Jason Aaron's amazing run on Thor

[IMJ]

It doesn't matter. These movies haven't been for the fandom that made them popular in the first place for a long time now. The funny thing is that they could follow the source material more closely and the Marvel-apologists (ie. it's the BEST Marvel movie YET!) wouldn't even know.

It's all just a counter-argument against long-term fans for some strange reason.

What it boils down to is that there are three groups.

1 the group who won't pay for what they don't like or disagree with
2 the group who has to be part of "something" and look at these movies as their life-sanity (i.e. the Marvel apologists)
3 the addicts who "just go see it hoping that it will be great" but then complain after paying for it.

The simple fact is that group 3 are the people who need to resist their addictions and just walk away from questionable content. That's it. It's that simple. Group 2 are the life-needy-lost. They need to find happiness in anything to maintain their sanity. They'll keep paying.

[Mayhem]

Originally Posted by Leo656

"So like, I always loved the idea of Sherlock Holmes. But THEN I thought 'Well, what if we 'tweaked' it so more people could get into it? Like, what if he smoked crack and flew around on a jetpack, and his sidekick was a talking dog named Watson who actually did all the work and solved all the mysteries? Wouldn't THAT be an awesome movie? So that's what we did for Sherlock Holmes, to bring it to a wider audience!"

Well, he did smoke crack, okay took strong opioids, which was a widely accepted thing for men in upper society to do back in the late Victorian age. Drugs are bad, mmmmkay, which is why that aspect generally gets airbrushed from any adaptations.

[Andrew NDB]

As not a Marvel guy ever, I haven't been deeply invested in this. In DC, yes, I have strong opinions rooted in the comics I bought as a kid and mass-collected as an adult. So I have a relaxed standard of viewing, say, the first three "phases" of the MCU. I have no invested interest and all I care is that I'm entertained.

That said, the same plague that's befell DC befell Marvel. Bureaucracy. Sticky notes. From above. From who knows how many groups. Hitting comics and animation and movies and everything. It's not quite like TMNT where it's just a constant -- and very bizarre -- cycle of absorbing and regurgitating old Fred Wolf stuff and then re-absorbing it from the thing that did it last like 2012 and Rise and all... it's that past a certain point these comics were clearly being written with a mandate to adhere to the movies they made. Which were based on older comics. Which worked for Phase 1 of the MCU. But now we're on Phase 4/5. And now we're getting into some really sh***ty territory, because they're adapting stuff from the last 10 years, which is full-on in territory where Disney was in charge and mandating this or that and heavy with the sticky notes.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Mayhem

Well, he did smoke crack, okay took strong opioids, which was a widely accepted thing for men in upper society to do back in the late Victorian age. Drugs are bad, mmmmkay, which is why that aspect generally gets airbrushed from any adaptations.

Sherlock smoked crack which was widely accepted in high society? I had no clue. Pretty interesting.

Although I guess it shouldn’t surprise me too much coming from the time and place.

[TigerClaw]

I think its because trying to recreate the exact same story from the comics, There wouldn't be much of a surprise when you see the movie adaptions, If you read the comics and know how the story begins and ends, Then watching the movie version you're expecting that the story will end exactly like in the comics isn't always the best case, Because you wouldn't get enough enjoyment knowing how the story goes, Its better to have a completely different story that tells the events of the comics, But tells them in a different way so that there is enough of a surprise.

Because there is stuff from those comics that are kind of outdated, So these movie adaptions tend to update them to current times.

There been a number of cases where MCU movies have effected the comics, To the point where the comics are being more like the MCU movies in a way.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

Because there is stuff from those comics that are kind of outdated, So these movie adaptions tend to update them to current times.

A well-done and reasonable example of what you've described was updating Iron Man's origin from Vietnam to taking place in Afghanistan. The origin story remains timeless, but placing it in Afghanistan was more prescient and served the timeliness of the release. This was a good call.

An example of nonsense-agenda hiding behind "an update for the times argument" is removing the Mandarin from Iron Man's existence almost completely so as to place him in a politically correct Kung-Fu movie - a move that in many ways was actually more cliched racism than the racism they claimed would've existed by leaving the Mandarin in Iron Man continuity. For example, placing the Mandarin in Iron Man could've led to a character-update making the Mandarin a businessman-genius-foil to Iron Man. But instead Disney, in the name of "raasss-cism" put the Mandarin into Shang-Chi, ironically as an ancient, kung-fu, Fu-Man-Chu style, karate-villain only without the mustache and "nyah nyah!" vocabulary.

But the Marvel movie sheep eat it up and couldn't even rationalize on their own what I've pointed out above. They just defend the strange agenda about "source material" and "racism!", etc.

It's all a "lie of appeasement" from Marvel/Disney to save face, dude. They say it, the shill media gets behind it, the sheeple read the shill media and say "yeah yeah that's it exactly" and go the theater all while believing they are fighting the good fight. And the sheep are so dug in that they'd read what I just wrote and still say "but duuude you can't put the comics directly on the screen" even though I literally just delivered a perfect comparison/contrast example of the concept.

And so, the problem isn't the concept of "source material", dude. The problem is the manipulators and the manipulated who shell out the money.

And once again, condescending or not, I challenge anyone here on this forum to read what I've said above and correctly summarize it. That's not me being "holier than thou" but rather trying to see if the people here dug-in on their opinions can even remotely shake themselves into the truth at all. But those same people would simply call it "condescending" although never look at their own positioning.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by IMJ

A well-done and reasonable example of what you've described was updating Iron Man's origin from Vietnam to taking place in Afghanistan. The origin story remains timeless, but placing it in Afghanistan was more prescient and served the timeliness of the release. This was a good call.

An example of nonsense-agenda hiding behind "an update for the times argument" is removing the Mandarin from Iron Man's existence almost completely so as to place him in a politically correct Kung-Fu movie - a move that in many ways was actually more cliched racism than the racism they claimed would've existed by leaving the Mandarin in Iron Man continuity. For example, placing the Mandarin in Iron Man could've led to a character-update making the Mandarin a businessman-genius-foil to Iron Man. But instead Disney, in the name of "raasss-cism" put the Mandarin into Shang-Chi, ironically as an ancient, kung-fu, Fu-Man-Chu style, karate-villain only without the mustache and "nyah nyah!" vocabulary.

But the Marvel movie sheep eat it up and couldn't even rationalize on their own what I've pointed out above. They just defend the strange agenda about "source material" and "racism!", etc.

It's all a "lie of appeasement" from Marvel/Disney to save face, dude. They say it, the shill media gets behind it, the sheeple read the shill media and say "yeah yeah that's it exactly" and go the theater all while believing they are fighting the good fight. And the sheep are so dug in that they'd read what I just wrote and still say "but duuude you can't put the comics directly on the screen" even though I literally just delivered a perfect comparison/contrast example of the concept.

And so, the problem isn't the concept of "source material", dude. The problem is the manipulators and the manipulated who shell out the money.

And once again, condescending or not, I challenge anyone here on this forum to read what I've said above and correctly summarize it. That's not me being "holier than thou" but rather trying to see if the people here dug-in on their opinions can even remotely shake themselves into the truth at all. But those same people would simply call it "condescending" although never look at their own positioning.

I've seen the example used a few times and haven't seen too many people give a decent rebuttal other than 'it's just a movie bro', cause the Mandarin just isn't popular in the general public.

But you damn well know that if in The Dark Knight, Batman was chasing Joker who was leaving threatening messages and whatnot on the TV and all that... and when he finally gets to him we find out there was no real Joker and he was just some random bum with make up hired by generic evil businessman for his plans. You know people would have crucified that movie if they pulled that stunt there, but since Mandarin is a relative unknown to the average normie, they just don't see it or refuse to understand the comparison.

[AquaParade]

I'm still very curious as to how they will reinvent Magneto's origin, now that the Holocaust was so long ago, relatively speaking.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

I'm still very curious as to how they will reinvent Magneto's origin, now that the Holocaust was so long ago, relatively speaking.

That's pretty much the main reason that Magneto (as cool as he was) looked so old in the movies, to kinda explain that.

Maybe they'll throw in some time travel shenanigans or whatever.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

That's pretty much the main reason that Magneto (as cool as he was) looked so old in the movies, to kinda explain that.

Maybe they'll throw in some time travel shenanigans or whatever.

Maybe but I suppose they could also just chuck it in with the rest of his mutant abilities. Bit of a stretch, but if they’re stuck on that origin, it’s possible.

It’s probably more likely that they just use another atrocity to justify his distrust of humanity.

Then again, will they respect his Jewish origin? Is that sacred? Is that considered an important minority in Hollywood? I am sort of expecting him to be black, but I rally so don’t know what the rules are anymore. I guess I don’t care.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Maybe but I suppose they could also just chuck it in with the rest of his mutant abilities. Bit of a stretch, but if they’re stuck on that origin, it’s possible.

It’s probably more likely that they just use another atrocity to justify his distrust of humanity.

I mean on one end, it's become such a big part of his history and to change it would be similar to saying Cap never served in WWII.

On the other end, the left is obsessed with the holocaust. There would be some major backlash if they changed that to some other tragedy.

Maybe you're right and they will say some made-up ******** about how he uses his internal magnetism brain synapses or what-the-****-ever to explain his powers also keep him looking younger longer. I didn't think of that but they might go that route.

Of course if they make him black.... that will change everything. They'd HAVE to create some new tragedy.

[Leo656]

Notes leaked out almost two whole years ago that they're going to circumvent the Holocaust angle by making Magneto either black, gay, or both, so that they can retain the "oppressed minority who advocates violence against the oppressive majority" while at the same time "contemporizing" it with a more modern flair. Given how X-Men comics have been a very transparent metaphor for the struggle for black and gay rights since the 1980s* they feel like in the current climate they can lean fully into it rather than just tap dance around it like the original movies did.

*I'm aware that the X-Men were always that to a degree but it was in the '80s when they really started banging the nail hard, especially with all of Kitty Pryde's full-page rants about how saying "Mutie" is exactly like saying "n*****", which went over so well with everyone.

I mean, I get why they're gonna do it like that, but it's dumb. I hate race-flipping, and while the jokes about Xavier and Magneto being star-crossed lovers are old hat by now it's like the jokes about Batman and Robin to me, like "Ha ha, now stop being stupid".

I mean, were it me, I'd just say "The X-Gene gives people much longer vitality" and bam, that's why someone who was in a Nazi concentration camp looks like an average middle aged-man in the present day, mutants simply age much more slowly. That would be such an innocuous change that would address Magneto's age discrepancy much more smoothly than by saying "The Stonewall Riots were exactly like The Holocaust if you squint", which is what they'll most likely do instead.

I mean it's whatever, "Nobody reads comics so they don't matter". I get it, I just don't like it and never will. The BEST stories with these characters are always on the printed page and not a single cartoon or movie has ever truly done it "better", so I will always bristle when the source material gets handwaved away on account of "It's more important to placate the functionally-illiterate". It simply shouldn't be that way.

[IMJ]

They'll call the new movie "X-Force". Guaranteed.

[neatoman]

... Is this a bad time to point out that Ultimate Magneto and the Magneto in Armored Adventures were simply subjected to unethical scientific experiments because of the mutation? I mean... Isn't that good enough? The 90's cartoon version is a victim of "a war" that happened in "a country" and I don't think anyone really questions what war and country because it's not really that important. I get wanting it to be a real event but you might as well make it something fictional if you don't want to deal with the consequences of doing so.

And if you really want it to be the Holocaust, you might as well say Hydra kept him frozen alongside Bucky.

[AquaParade]

Lol @ the idea that being gay is similar to experiencing the holocaust.

Hope those notes weren’t true, that sounds ridiculous.

That said, I can imagine Magneto as gay. Might even be sort of interesting and I could see the perspective of: “man or woman… as long as they’re mutant”.