Ingredients For A Successful Comic Book Movie
Irradiated by LabRat
Went to see X-Men: First Class last night. We liked it; it had its rough spots, but overall it was a major improvement over the last abortion of an X-Men movie, and that’s not even touching the Wolverine movie with a ten-meter cattle prod. At the time I concluded that the key ingredient for a successful X movie was including Bryan Singer on the project, but that’s a little limited.
It would be nice if Hollywood made more original projects instead of defaulting to sequel-animated-comic book movie-mindless action with big-name action star-lather-rinse-repeat, but as a comics fan, if they’re going to do a boatload of comic movies anyway they may as well be enjoyable. Iron Man and to an only slighter lesser extent its sequel were some of the movies I’ve had the most fun at in years, and in general Hollywood seems to have been recently perfecting the art of putting comics on film and having the results be better than the summertime joke they used to be*.
Here are some of the things the movies that have been working seem to have in common- or a lack common to the ones that don’t.
1. If you’re doing a comic book movie, you’re doing a movie centered around a character whose existence long predates your movie and the current stable of fashionable stars. In some cases, the character has been around since the birth of comics themselves- up to eighty years. Moviegoers may well have grown up with this character as part of their cultural mythology, and often they have some very definite ideas about the character. You aren’t going to gain any benefit from putting a popular star in the role because they’re popular, you’d be better off putting someone in the role who is unknown but especially suited to play that particular kind of character. If you have a popular star who happens to fit that criteria, hey, bonus- but remember that the movie is a vehicle for the character, not for the stars.
2. What works over months or years of plot arcing with a monthly book will not necessarily work for a two-hour movie. Do try to keep the comic canon as your touchstone, as there would be no point to using the name and the imagery of a character but none of what was built around it, but prioritize pacing and logical character development over comic continuity. Sometimes the things that make a comic book work well and add richness to it simply wouldn’t translate to film- the Tales of the Black Freighter subplot in Watchmen being an excellent case in point.
3. You are not actually obligated to do the origin story for your first movie in a particular comics canon. Chances are, especially for the most established characters, the audience either knows the hero(es) origin, or they don’t care that much. If the origin story would make a kickass story that can be easily paced for film length, then go for it, but don’t assume that you NEED to do it in order for your audience to swallow the costumed hero. Also bear in mind that if you’re working on a property that has already been approached several times, such as Batman or Superman, that much of the audience has seen, say, Bruce Wayne’s parents murdered many different times and unless you can do it better than all previous attempts, it’s probably not necessary. Also bear in mind that most of the classic superheroes were created in a new field that had somewhat low standards for writing at the time, and some origins are frankly stupid.
4. When using a character with origins relatively far back in time and culture, consider what it is about the character that makes that character work- and what traits are essential to recognizability beyond the costume- before you decide how much, if at all, to “update” the character. It is probably not a good idea to attempt to globalize Captain America, for example, and if you’re using Superman, you probably want to consider that Clark Kent exists to embody a purity of relatively simple values regardless of which decade you want to have him born in. Consider the themes a character is built around before you decide how to update him or her- or to set the entire thing in the past. Consider themes in general- if comic-book Catwoman is a bored, rich, reclusive thief who goes back and forth between being an anti-villain and an anti-hero and everything is in blacks and greys, making your movie Catwoman a plucky working girl in a brightly-colored world who gets mystical cat powers and fights corporate corruption is probably a bad idea.
5. Putting a fan in charge of the project is better than putting someone in charge who is totally unfamiliar with the characters in question. Putting someone who has less investment than a real fan but is willing to do their homework is probably a better idea yet- they’re more likely to prioritize basic principles of good storytelling over whatever it is they’d personally love to do with that character. They’re also less likely to try to shove all their favorite characters into the movie whether they fit or not.
6. If you want the flashiness and drawing power of a comic book movie but are bent on having a lot of creative freedom in character flexibility and storytelling, don’t insert your own character into a well-known mask, consider researching characters and properties that were either never big or have gone unused for a long time, then put your own spin on them. Neil Gaiman made an extremely successful comics career doing this, and Watchmen was originally based on use of characters DC had recently bought from Charlton Comics before DC decided Watchmen was too radical and they might want to USE those characters again. There is no reason whatsoever this basic idea cannot be used with a film, and is certainly a better option than inserting whatever kind of character you want into the same well-known costume. Men In Black is an excellent example of taking a little-known indie title and characters and adding a lot of director imagination.
7. Consider the basics of what you’re working with when choosing how to adapt them. Batman is based around a lone hero and a stable of interesting villains. X-Men is an ensemble in which the villains are less important but interactions among the team members are. Trying to highlight a single star in what was an originally an ensemble piece probably won’t go much better than trying to add more teammates to a loner.
8. Comics are a visual medium. Aesthetics count. A lot. However, given the sheer weight of suspension of disbelief that goes into costumed heroes, you still have to provide story and character- otherwise it’s more “light acid trip” than “movie”.
9. Consider some of the story choices made by writers in the property you’re trying to work with and why they were made, especially if you think you’re going to add appeal by doing something they didn’t. Especially if the character has existed for many decades, there’s highly likely to be an excellent reason why writers never took the story in certain directions- like giving Batman a girlfriend.
10. The thing that makes comics books work is a combination of Rule of Cool, making everything larger than life, and making the previous two things work by doing them with relatable characters with understandable motives and conflicts. If you de-prioritize motivation and create conflicts out of thin air or just because it would be neat to have these two people fight, you wind up with an extremely expensive mess. If you’re going to have someone dress up in a ridiculous costume to commit themed acts of evil, you had better give them a really good reason to be doing that rather than a stock of one-liners.
11. Try to accomplish some means of developing this character and sound story underpinnings other than having the characters sitting around and talking for the first hour of your movie. It’s a comic book; stuff that would be interesting to draw is supposed to happen, and happen often. Happily, they are both visual mediums. These two points are not mutually exclusive.
*For the record I wasn’t impressed by the Burton Batmans except for bits and pieces I thought worked excellently, disliked the Spider-Man movies with greater intensity by order of sequel, and am not such a huge fan of the Nolan Batmans either, though I think he did better than Burton did. (Possibly 80% of my objections there can be condensed to “Christian Bale… just Christian Bale”, too.) I don’t think a really well-done Superman movie has ever been made… etc.
June 14th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
When y’all get rich consulting to Hollywierd, YOU can buy dinner!
Excellent post, and dead on point!
June 14th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
Well written. Highly analytical. I like. Now I don’t have to go to Literature Appreciation 101 to figure out how to analyse the structure of the next…oh, wait… I can’t remember the last time I saw a movie- probably due to my undeveloped ability to actually THINK about how it was put together. See what you’ve done, Labrat? Now I’m gonna get fat(ter) eating blechy popcorn and poorer paying outrageous prices. Thanks!
You’ve enabled me to do my part in helping the economy recover. Seriously, good post.
June 14th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
I really enjoyed Superman Returns. Mainly because Brandon Routh was smoking hot.
Liked the first Spider-Man movie, the first Iron Man movie, Batman Begins, the first X-Men…are you seeing a trend here?
I loved Watchmen, probably because I had no clue about the source material, so was able to watch it without any bias. And the ending came as a total shock to me.
Thor…*sigh*. LOVED Thor.
I’m looking forward to X-men First Class, The Green Lantern, and whatever else Hollywood cooks up in this genre. I’m a sucker for superheroes.
June 14th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
So…which comic-book movies did you like?….just curious….
I thought the recent Marvel movies (Thor, Iron Man, FF, X-1st) were pretty good. I liked the Nolan Batman movies much better than their predecessors. Didn’t like the Donner Superman/Messiah movies at all. And I’m looking forward to The Avengers (esp. if Nathan Fillion is Henry Pym).
Good blog, Labrat!
June 14th, 2011 at 10:02 pm
Huge fan of the Iron Man adaptations. Haven’t seen Thor yet but anticipate liking it based on feedback I’ve heard from trusted sources. Loved Watchmen, thought the movie and the book both worked very well in their own ways. Liked X-1, liked X-2 more, mostly because I liked certain acting performances a lot (Stryker). X-3 was horrible. X-Men First Class was pretty great, and the direct inspiration for the post.
Men In Black I adore, Mystery Men I like plenty too but isn’t quite as good- though it’s another “very small indie title, director imagination + good ensemble cast”. The Superman hasn’t been MADE that I liked- though I liked the DCAU Bruce Timm and Paul Dini created quite a lot, including their Superman.
Spiderman… the first movie was OK, not really being a Spiderman fan doesn’t help there and I like snarky Peter more than earnest Peter. 2 we hated so much we watched the entire thing on fast forward. 3 we did not bother with. Fantastic Four was a big thumbs-down.
Nolan… he does a lot of things right, at least as many if not more than Burton or Schumacher did. I just really despise Christian Bale’s Batman, which is a shame because I like many of the villains and REALLY like the Gordon.
June 14th, 2011 at 10:43 pm
Hopefully Hollywood is over the tendency to Camp things up.
Anyway, I’d love to see a film version of “Superman: Red Son”… but that’ll never happen.
June 15th, 2011 at 4:56 am
I thought Christian Bale did a pretty good Batman, and I have willingly watched the Wolverine movie more than once.
But I also liked Iron Man and Thor and X:1st Class, and well… I like most comic book movies, really.
I wish the licensing issue could get resolved such that the X-Men could show up in the Avengers arc movies, but I guess those are probably going to get busy enough as it is.
June 15th, 2011 at 11:07 am
I loved Superman Returns (more than any other Superman movie, actually…) and Iron Man, liked Iron Man 2, the first two Spiderman movies, the first two X-Men movies…I’d like Watchmen more if it weren’t for the annoying bouts of sex…
June 15th, 2011 at 11:15 am
“Nolan… he does a lot of things right, at least as many if not more than Burton or Schumacher did. I just really despise Christian Bale’s Batman, which is a shame because I like many of the villains and REALLY like the Gordon.”
Bale is pretty good as Bruce Wayne (as was Michael Keaton)…as Batman, not as much. The only one I’ve seen that did well as both was, surprisingly enough, Val Kilmer. I’d like to see Kilmer take the role in a Nolan film…it’d be better than the dreadful one he had to do last time….
BTW, what about superhero TV series? Which ones did you (and everyone else) like? I think the best of the breed was the ’90’s version of The Flash (live-action) and Batman-The Animated Series (animated, duh)……though Human Target was also pretty good…..
June 15th, 2011 at 11:24 am
The problem with Nolan’s Batman is everyone in the cast is stronger than Bale. But I’m not sure how one would go about fixing that.
June 15th, 2011 at 12:21 pm
Seeker- yep, nail/head. Bale doesn’t bother me walking around being Bruce, but as Batman he’s just so forced he makes me want to horselaugh. That laryngitis Batvoice just… epic facepalm. I also agree Kilmer was oddly good in the role, but was given a terrible script to work with. (I actually have a soft spot for Forever- it did so many things terribly but I liked Kilmer’s performance, the score, and Tommy Lee Jones having way too much fun devouring the scenery at the speed of sound.) I think Spear has it right… Bale is all the worse off for the fact that everyone around him is just excellent, and he’s… not.
As for TV, like we said, we LOVE the Timm/Dini animated series. That’s the original Batman: The Animated Series, the Superman one, Batman: Beyond (which really should have been terrible but wasn’t), and the Justice League series that ran on Cartoon Network. Honestly I think those guys made some better decisions with writing than the mainstream DC canon at the time.
I have heard excellent things about Birds of Prey and my next move is going to be to see if Netflix has it…
June 16th, 2011 at 1:22 am
“Rule of Cool”
You’re a troper, aren’t you
June 16th, 2011 at 6:15 am
BIRDS OF PREY was a good series…started off weak, but the series finale was all sorts of awesome….you’ll like it…esp. if you’re a Shemar Moore (CRIMINAL MINDS) fan….
If you like campy, see if you can find the old SUPERBOY series ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094559/ )…the guy who plays Lex Luthor (Sherman Howard) plays it way over the top…even more than Hackman and Spacey…..
June 16th, 2011 at 12:15 pm
Superman Returns was good except for the way he got creepy/stalker in the middle of the movie…and “Truth, Justice…all that stuff.”
Oh, and the costume color shift sucked.
June 18th, 2011 at 10:50 am
How about the superhero predecessors, pulp heroes? I can’t remember any really good movies with them, although I think the early 90’s ‘The Shadow’ with Alec Baldwin was tolerable (even if I generally do not like Alec Baldwin, and never did).
It would be nice to see a good ‘Tarzan’ movie. Some of the old Weismuller ones are okay, but they are really not about the same character as the original ERB novels were, and I don’t think there has ever been a movie which truly used that original concept.
I do have hopes for the upcoming movie of the other big Burroughs series hero, John Carter, but I’m not going to start cheering before I have seen the movie. But swashbuckling on an Victorian era version of Mars, with a properly heroic and gentlemanly main character - well, the part I’m most scared for is actually that last bit, I think there is a good chance he has been more or less ‘updated’ - well, if they haven’t changed too much that could be one of the real treats of next year’s movies.
June 18th, 2011 at 11:18 am
The best and most successful pulp action movie series ever made was Indiana Jones, the character just didn’t have a prior existence on the page. But Lucas and Spielberg were very specifically trying to make that genre, and succeeded wildly in my opinion.
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen tried, but failed. (That one actually qualifies as a meta two-fer- it’s a movie of a comic book that was a collection of pulp characters into a super-team.) The biggest problem with it was that Alan Moore, the comic’s author, and the producers making the movie wanted to do two RADICALLY different things with the same concept and characters, and without keeping the backbone from the original or substituting an equally strong one the movie collapsed in on itself. The end result was a movie with some great scenes in it that completely failed to hang together as a whole.
Sky Captain and The World of Tomorrow was another tried-but-failed. The whole thing is absolutely gorgeous and had a great epic feel that worked well in the theater (or at least did for me when I turned up), but the story made little sense and they managed to completely fail to make either of the show’s main protagonists the least bit likable. A pulp movie generally fails when you are actively praying the main protagonists will be eaten by alligators just so they’ll shut up for awhile.
I have high hopes for Carter as well- I think Hollywood has room in it for doing that right- but low expectations.
June 18th, 2011 at 11:39 am
Oh yes, you’re right, never thought of that but Indy really is a pulp hero.
June 19th, 2011 at 9:22 am
I like the idea of replacing Bale with Val Kilmer and keeping everybody else the same. Kilmer is, IMHO, one of Hollywood’s most talented actors - he can play a role so well that you don’t realize it’s him until his name pops up in the credits (his performance as doc Holliday in Tombstone is a good example of this).
Superman Returns was a good movie, but it was essentially a tribute film and a continuation of the Christopher Reeve films, with the ‘bumbling’ Clark Kent portrayal. But, yes, Brandon Routh *was* smoking hot. He also nailed the Chris Reeve portrayals of both Superman and Clark Kent about as exactly as humanly possible. The franchise could do with a reboot, at this point, though.
Thor was very well done (though when they first showed Asgard, Queen’s “Flash” theme immediately popped into my head). I think Chris Hemsworth did an excellent job, and the story was well done, too.
Both Iron Man films were good, and the first two X-Men films were good, too. When they lost Bryan Singer for X3, they made a bad choice for his replacement. Wolverine wasn’t bad, but could have been a lot better, too.
I’ve been afraid to see the latest X-Men, and now I’ve heard that Green Lantern is somewhat wanting. That leaves Captain America to revive the hopes this summer, but it looks promising.
June 20th, 2011 at 10:25 am
I’m not familiar enough with the comics to know which franchise screwed it up, but my biggest beef with the new X-men is the fundamental change it has introduced into the relationship between Xavier and Magneto. That and Mystique’s back story is not very interesting (to have spent so much of the movie on it seemed like folly). Beast’s transformation seemed forced, and I would have rather seen him developed more than some of the throw-aways.
Also, the Nazi doctor does not equal the antagonist in the 60s; they simply did not look or act like the same character. I’m not asking for believable characters in a comic book movie, but I at least want continuity.
Oh, and the female cast members were all pretty hot, but then again, so is Blake Lively. I saw both this weekend, and I think GL > X-M:FC
June 22nd, 2011 at 9:47 am
WRT #2:
I’d argue that V for Vendetta is a better and more extreme example of paring content for translation than Watchmen, and is at the same time a good example of streamlining while sticking to the core values of the original.
Also, I loved the shit out of that movie. Hugo Weaving has some serious voice-acting chops.