LogFAQs > #914640600

Zeus posted...

Maybe, maybe not. If a character could work outside of the traditional superhero sense, they could run it as more of a garden variety action film or in another genre entirely.

Yeah, but if you stray too far outside the superhero sense we're really not talking about a "comic book movie" any more. That term usually refers to superhero stories specifically.

Like, the movie "From Hell" was based on the Alan Moore comic, but it was a movie about Jack the Ripper, so most people who saw it would never know it was a comic book first. Same with stuff like Timecop or Men in Black. Very few people would call them comic book movies, even though they're movies based on comic books.

My point was more that, there are costumed heroes who have no powers (like the Punisher), or ones with very low-level powers (like Daredevil), who tend to fight low-level threats (like mobsters or occult martial artists or whatever) instead of world-shaking alien invasions or robot apocalypses. And those don't necessarily work as well in film, because people go to see "superhero movies" expecting bombastic over-the-top action for the most part (even Batman tends to focus more on the more unrealistic aspects of the character).



Zeus posted...

Can't really expect the movie side to cooperate, given that side has more money to splash around >_>

Yeah, but you'd still expect them to cooperate to some degree, because they ARE part of the same company, and because working together can make both sides more successful and generate more revenue for the overall company as a whole. Petty dick-swinging just loses money for everyone.

If anything, that's the main problem DC's always had. Because DC and Warner Bros. are both owned by the same company, every DC movie gets shunted to Warner Bros by default. But Warner Bros as an entity clearly doesn't actually want to make comic book movies, and has always had a somewhat adversarial relationship with DC (plenty of people in DC have mentioned that they're rarely consulted on comic films, and even when they are their advice is usually ignored). Which probably plays a role in why most DC films seem to suck so badly, and often miss the entire point of the characters.

It's also potentially why DC animation has done so well over the years - for most of the time that Dini and Timm were in charge of things, there was always a strong sense of cooperation and respect with DC and the animation teams working together, which in turn tended to produce products that were much better overall.

When it comes to Disney, it seems like the overarching company of Disney and Marvel as a sub-property have always seemed to work well together, while Marvel Studios as a film company and Marvel as a comic publisher have always had strong reciprocity, which absolutely helped the quality of the films. But for some reason, the film department seems to strongly dislike the TV department, in spite of the film department basically being the ones who helped establish the TV department in the first place.

I also wonder if this might become a worse problem for Disney in general in the future, as it's been mentioned that a lot of the division heads are sort of standoffish with each other, because they're all going to be in competition for the CEO role soon once the current regime steps down (which is going to be very soon). If their overall unity starts to fracture more, it might lead to a drop in quality for the product as a whole.


---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family