|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Apr 3, 2018 16:03:14 GMT
This is meant to be a little constructive criticism towards DC and how they don't understand what a proper adaption is, particular Snyder. First off, people may not recognize this, but an adaption of a source material isn't necessarily a direct adaption or beat-to-beat or panel-to-panel of that source material and put onto film. Take Watchman for example, another Snyder film, and as to why it has polarized reviews. It gets high praise for being a faithful adaption of the comic run. There are a couple of plot points that been changed for the film, but overall you could put the comic and the film next to each other and the film generally follows point A to point B to point C pretty consistently as the comics does. But it got bad reviews as well because it was too much like the comics because it's not a proper adaption.
An adaption is referencing something from a source material but presenting it in your own way and execution but still has the same aftermath and underlying context to it. Look at Civil War. In the comics, the superhero registration was as a result of a clash between a bunch of new Avengers and a villain, Nitro, who could explode himself, and Nitro had destroyed a school I believe that killed some children as well. The movie obviously changed that with Crossbones detonating a bomb that destroyed part of a hospital and killed some Wakandans. But it's still an adaption, and a proper one as well of the comics because it's the same idea as in the comics of a bomb going off and killing some people and setting up the Accords (the movie version of the superhero registration but the same idea behind it).
Likewise, with Logan, a major inspiration was the Old Man Logan run and a big plot point in that was Wolverine killing all the mutants, or at least the X-Men. In the movie, this is adapted with Prof. X having a seizure that kills most of the mutants, and it still retains a lot of the themes and the underlying context, just with a different execution.
Snyder however seems to think recreating a panel beat-to-beat is an adaption, when it's not. A lot of the shots and scenes in BvS were recreations of panels from The Dark Knight Returns. While it may be cool to look at, it lacks context to it that was behind it in the comics. This is why Logan and Civil War are so good and really set a bar for comic book movie adaptions
|
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 3, 2018 17:05:33 GMT
The thing with both Civil War and Logan is that it presents us with lead & supporting characters that weve developed a positive relationship with through years and years of watching them grow their characters on screen. So when they get put into situations like Civil War and Logan, we have great vested interest in the eventual outcome.
DCEU didnt develop any of their characters or be patient enough to have the audience bond with them. Superman shouldnt be killed in his 2nd outing. Batman, aquaman and Flash needed solo films before the ensemble movies. I didnt give a crap about Cyborgs internal struggle in JL because its so forced and you hardly know the guy. If you're going to adapt a storyline, make sure first the groundwork is in place.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Apr 4, 2018 6:14:40 GMT
My problem with civil war is the depth was lacking. marvel just cant help but keep things derivate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Apr 4, 2018 6:41:16 GMT
Didn’t care for Civil War that much. My problem with civil war is the depth was lacking. marvel just cant help but keep things derivate. We all know you didn’t watch either. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 12:33:51 GMT
My problem with civil war is the depth was lacking. marvel just cant help but keep things derivate. There was more depth than the X-Men's continued Holocaust Exploitation. Civil War just wasn't ashamed of its comic book origins. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Apr 4, 2018 12:39:13 GMT
My problem with civil war is the depth was lacking. marvel just cant help but keep things derivate. There was more depth than the X-Men's continued Holocaust Exploitation. Civil War just wasn't ashamed of its comic book origins. [/quote] Then why was X-men accurate to the comics with Magneto and the Holocaust but Captain America Civil War was absolutely nothing like the Civil War storyline from the comics? |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 12:43:45 GMT
Then why was X-men accurate to the comics with Magneto and the Holocaust but Captain America Civil War was absolutely nothing like the Civil War storyline from the comics? Because I can admit when even the comics have silly things in them that should be forgotten (Bucky being a kid instead of someone closer in age to Steve, Xavier being crippled by an Alien named Lucifer, Scott's father being a space pirate rebel, etc) or changed in adaptations. Magneto's origin story is just exploited again and again to try and justify everything he does (it's not a proper excuse, no matter how the movies spin it) and the comic version of Civil War was riddled with stupid (Cap being out of touch because he didn't use Myspace). If the movies stay true to the spirit, I'm lenient on being true to the letter. The X-Men films don't do that, they keep going for that bankrupt "grounded" approach that nearly destroyed CBMs. |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Apr 4, 2018 13:16:00 GMT
The thing with both Civil War and Logan is that it presents us with lead & supporting characters that weve developed a positive relationship with through years and years of watching them grow their characters on screen. So when they get put into situations like Civil War and Logan, we have great vested interest in the eventual outcome. DCEU didnt develop any of their characters or be patient enough to have the audience bond with them. Superman shouldnt be killed in his 2nd outing. Batman, aquaman and Flash needed solo films before the ensemble movies. I didnt give a crap about Cyborgs internal struggle in JL because its so forced and you hardly know the guy. If you're going to adapt a storyline, make sure first the groundwork is in place. Finally! Someone else who agreed with me about Superman's death! That didn't feel like it was earned, there was no emotional connection to Clark Kent for us, the audience, to care about Superman's death. The funeral was shot well, i'll give Snyder that, but honestly i was more annoyed by it. That's why Marvel in general, Both the X-Men films and MCU films, have been kicking ass lately. They Earned Logan, They earned Civil War, because they have been laying down the ground work for them. Could you imagine if Fox made Logan right after the first X-Men film? It would be terrible! |
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 4, 2018 13:53:26 GMT
The thing with both Civil War and Logan is that it presents us with lead & supporting characters that weve developed a positive relationship with through years and years of watching them grow their characters on screen. So when they get put into situations like Civil War and Logan, we have great vested interest in the eventual outcome. DCEU didnt develop any of their characters or be patient enough to have the audience bond with them. Superman shouldnt be killed in his 2nd outing. Batman, aquaman and Flash needed solo films before the ensemble movies. I didnt give a crap about Cyborgs internal struggle in JL because its so forced and you hardly know the guy. If you're going to adapt a storyline, make sure first the groundwork is in place. Finally! Someone else who agreed with me about Superman's death! That didn't feel like it was earned, there was no emotional connection to Clark Kent for us, the audience, to care about Superman's death. The funeral was shot well, i'll give Snyder that, but honestly i was more annoyed by it. That's why Marvel in general, Both the X-Men films and MCU films, have been kicking ass lately. They Earned Logan, They earned Civil War, because they have been laying down the ground work for them. Could you imagine if Fox made Logan right after the first X-Men film? It would be terrible! The Superman death in BvS reeks of Snyder - style over substance. It was shot brilliantly like you said but theres no weight behind it and it comes off so fake. And even though Fox made Origins, they werent stupid enough to kill Logan only to have him return in the next film. |
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 4, 2018 14:00:06 GMT
Magneto's origin story is just exploited again and again to try and justify everything he does (it's not a proper excuse, no matter how the movies spin it) and the comic version of Civil War was riddled with stupid (Cap being out of touch because he didn't use Myspace). If the movies stay true to the spirit, I'm lenient on being true to the letter. The X-Men films don't do that, they keep going for that bankrupt "grounded" approach that nearly destroyed CBMs. Haha such BS. Firstly, the movies are closer to the spirit of the comics than Disney would make them. Secondly, when Disney do get Magneto i guarantee they will use his Holocaust history in films because its essential for his characterization. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 14:10:07 GMT
Haha such BS. Firstly, the movies are closer to the spirit of the comics than Disney would make them. No, Disney wouldn't ignore there's more to the world than just Xavier vs Magneto and would actually have the X-Men start to succeed in their mission instead of always going back to the status quo. Maybe, but they'll point out how what happened in the Holocaust isn't like what's going on with mutants. Which is something FoX is too incompetent to do. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 4, 2018 14:34:32 GMT
The thing with both Civil War and Logan is that it presents us with lead & supporting characters that weve developed a positive relationship with through years and years of watching them grow their characters on screen. So when they get put into situations like Civil War and Logan, we have great vested interest in the eventual outcome. DCEU didnt develop any of their characters or be patient enough to have the audience bond with them. Superman shouldnt be killed in his 2nd outing. Batman, aquaman and Flash needed solo films before the ensemble movies. I didnt give a crap about Cyborgs internal struggle in JL because its so forced and you hardly know the guy. If you're going to adapt a storyline, make sure first the groundwork is in place. Finally! Someone else who agreed with me about Superman's death! That didn't feel like it was earned, there was no emotional connection to Clark Kent for us, the audience, to care about Superman's death. The funeral was shot well, i'll give Snyder that, but honestly i was more annoyed by it. That's why Marvel in general, Both the X-Men films and MCU films, have been kicking ass lately. They Earned Logan, They earned Civil War, because they have been laying down the ground work for them. Could you imagine if Fox made Logan right after the first X-Men film? It would be terrible! This pretty much sums up all my feelings about everything DCEU is doing. So little of what they've done is earned, particularly with Superman. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Apr 4, 2018 17:15:07 GMT
My problem with civil war is the depth was lacking. marvel just cant help but keep things derivate. come on! What about "I don't care, he killed the mom" was not deep...?
We were so deeply invested in Iron's mommy issues that were firmly explored in the previous films that we just had to see his conflicts take center stage in Cap's last Avenger trilogy movie.
And why derivative: "You should not have ckilled my mom...or squished my walkman" came after Cap 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Apr 4, 2018 17:29:36 GMT
This is meant to be a little constructive criticism towards DC and how they don't understand what a proper adaption is, particular Snyder. First off, people may not recognize this, but an adaption of a source material isn't necessarily a direct adaption or beat-to-beat or panel-to-panel of that source material and put onto film. Take Watchman for example, another Snyder film, and as to why it has polarized reviews. It gets high praise for being a faithful adaption of the comic run. There are a couple of plot points that been changed for the film, but overall you could put the comic and the film next to each other and the film generally follows point A to point B to point C pretty consistently as the comics does. But it got bad reviews as well because it was too much like the comics because it's not a proper adaption. An adaption is referencing something from a source material but presenting it in your own way and execution but still has the same aftermath and underlying context to it. Look at Civil War. In the comics, the superhero registration was as a result of a clash between a bunch of new Avengers and a villain, Nitro, who could explode himself, and Nitro had destroyed a school I believe that killed some children as well. The movie obviously changed that with Crossbones detonating a bomb that destroyed part of a hospital and killed some Wakandans. But it's still an adaption, and a proper one as well of the comics because it's the same idea as in the comics of a bomb going off and killing some people and setting up the Accords (the movie version of the superhero registration but the same idea behind it). Likewise, with Logan, a major inspiration was the Old Man Logan run and a big plot point in that was Wolverine killing all the mutants, or at least the X-Men. In the movie, this is adapted with Prof. X having a seizure that kills most of the mutants, and it still retains a lot of the themes and the underlying context, just with a different execution. Snyder however seems to think recreating a panel beat-to-beat is an adaption, when it's not. A lot of the shots and scenes in BvS were recreations of panels from The Dark Knight Returns. While it may be cool to look at, it lacks context to it that was behind it in the comics. This is why Logan and Civil War are so good and really set a bar for comic book movie adaptions While I understand, and agree with, the point you are making... I think lumping the DCEU in with Snyder is disparaging to the DCEU. And I very much feel that Civil War was fine, better than anything the DCEU has done aside from Wonder Woman, but vastly overrated. |
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Apr 4, 2018 17:30:56 GMT
The thing with both Civil War and Logan is that it presents us with lead & supporting characters that weve developed a positive relationship with through years and years of watching them grow their characters on screen. So when they get put into situations like Civil War and Logan, we have great vested interest in the eventual outcome. DCEU didnt develop any of their characters or be patient enough to have the audience bond with them. Superman shouldnt be killed in his 2nd outing. Batman, aquaman and Flash needed solo films before the ensemble movies. I didnt give a crap about Cyborgs internal struggle in JL because its so forced and you hardly know the guy. If you're going to adapt a storyline, make sure first the groundwork is in place. That didn't feel like it was earned, there was no emotional connection to Clark Kent for us, the audience, to care about Superman's death. The funeral was shot well, i'll give Snyder that, but honestly i was more annoyed by it. That's why Marvel in general, Both the X-Men films and MCU films, have been kicking ass lately. They Earned Logan, They earned Civil War, because they have been laying down the ground work for them. Could you imagine if Fox made Logan right after the first X-Men film? It would be terrible! I have never met, nor spoken to, ANYONE who thought killing Superman was a good idea. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 17:31:01 GMT
My problem with civil war is the depth was lacking. marvel just cant help but keep things derivate. come on! What about "I don't care, he killed the mom" was not deep...?& It was better than "I killed the X-Men cause I had a seizure." Tony's character in general, really. The MCU movies aren't usual "trilogies", they're all part of the greater storyline going on. This is Next Generation storytelling, rather than the usual way. Fits Starlord's character and we know the Walkman had more value to him than just as a musical device. It meant more than "I agree with everything you said but you killed my mom so you die now" from Magneto in FC, mainly because GOTG2 didn't need to use the Holocaust for anything. |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Apr 4, 2018 18:00:41 GMT
Then why was X-men accurate to the comics with Magneto and the Holocaust but Captain America Civil War was absolutely nothing like the Civil War storyline from the comics? Because I can admit when even the comics have silly things in them that should be forgotten (Bucky being a kid instead of someone closer in age to Steve, Xavier being crippled by an Alien named Lucifer, Scott's father being a space pirate rebel, etc) or changed in adaptations. Magneto's origin story is just exploited again and again to try and justify everything he does (it's not a proper excuse, no matter how the movies spin it) and the comic version of Civil War was riddled with stupid (Cap being out of touch because he didn't use Myspace). If the movies stay true to the spirit, I'm lenient on being true to the letter. The X-Men films don't do that, they keep going for that bankrupt "grounded" approach that nearly destroyed CBMs. I don't mind the Magneto thing. It's always going to be the main part of his character. Kinda like Spider-Man's main motivation is always going to be his failure to act in Uncle Ben's death and Batman's main motivation will always be seeing his parents murder. Isn't Loki always going to be motivated by his daddy issues? Starlord and his mommy issues? I think that's fine. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Apr 4, 2018 18:18:31 GMT
Because I can admit when even the comics have silly things in them that should be forgotten (Bucky being a kid instead of someone closer in age to Steve, Xavier being crippled by an Alien named Lucifer, Scott's father being a space pirate rebel, etc) or changed in adaptations. Magneto's origin story is just exploited again and again to try and justify everything he does (it's not a proper excuse, no matter how the movies spin it) and the comic version of Civil War was riddled with stupid (Cap being out of touch because he didn't use Myspace). If the movies stay true to the spirit, I'm lenient on being true to the letter. The X-Men films don't do that, they keep going for that bankrupt "grounded" approach that nearly destroyed CBMs. I don't mind the Magneto thing. It's always going to be the main part of his character. Kinda like Spider-Man's main motivation is always going to be his failure to act in Uncle Ben's death and Batman's main motivation will always be seeing his parents murder. Isn't Loki always going to be motivated by his daddy issues? Starlord and his mommy issues? I think that's fine. I think Starlord started coming to terms with his Mom stuff in the first movie and then finished it off in the second. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Apr 4, 2018 21:24:12 GMT
The X-Men films don't do that, they keep going for that bankrupt "grounded" approach that nearly destroyed CBMs. That's pretty much the complete opposite of what happened. After the comic book zaniness of Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, it was thanks to movies like X-men and Spider-man why they are still making these movies today. |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Apr 4, 2018 22:57:48 GMT
Logan is great. I can't see anything in the DCEU ever touching it.
Civil War was very good, but it could have been great if the color grading wasn't so ugly. The movie is awful to look at in some cases. The subpar visuals kind of sank it for me.
|
|
