36 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 2664969-Iron-Man-3-Official-Couch.jpg]
Just got back from seeing pic related, but instead of making a thread about my thoughts on it, I wanted to make one about adaptations in general.
A lot of people didn't like the mandarin twist to it, and that got me thinking: Can hardcore fans really get mad at someone for trying to get a fresh spin on an established character?
I'm starting to think that simply taking the source material and doing a straight adaptation would be the LAZY thing to do as a writer. Sure it takes SOME skill not to fuck up an adaption, but to create something new that both old and new fans (average movie goer) can both get a kick out of takes immensely more skill, and I think we should be glad that there are writers out there who actually try and succeed at doing this.
If an established story is already good, then doing a faithful, straight adaptation would appease the fans an the new viewers alike, yes. But...isn't that kinda lame to think that you as a writer would do it just to avoid the wave of whining from fans when you know you could do more?
Yes, when they fuck up an adaptation beyond repair, it does suck to see our favorite characters completely botched....but when it works? Man, that's magical. Is it worth the risk?
So /co/, if it were up to you, as a writer, would you do a faithful adaptation of an established character or would you go out of the way to try and do something SLIGHTLY new or creative with it?
STORYTIME: n52 Action Comics - Part 1
218 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: img_001.jpg]
It's late /co/, but not too late for a storytime thread. Tonight, for your entertainment we have the first if time permits eight issues of Grant Morrison's run on Action Comics.
There are a lot of Superman origin stories: Birthright, Byrne's Man of Steel, John's Secret Origin. All of them good, but none with that trademark Morrison Madness.
So grab a drink and a snack, sit back, and get comfy. It's Superman time!