Wow. Look at this past decade. So many of our favorite superheroes who were once thought to be only entertaining enough for children are now getting their own movies which then turn into huge franchises. Of course, movies and comic books are 2 very different mediums and sometimes things get changed from the comic when transitioning to the big screen.
This is mostly true when you have a character from Marvel or DC. The characters from those companies have been around for years, longer than the span of many of our lives. And, when you have characters that have been around that long, you are going to have some really powerfully awesome stories and you are going to have some really terrible cheesy stories. In these cases, the creators involved in the films try to pull from the better stories. Let's take Chris Nolan's Batman stories for example. As beloved as they are, you will also find a lot of people who think that the real world take on Batman that Nolan has employed robs Batman of some his more fantastical but still thought prevoking stories. I can accept tha changes that Nolan has made though, not because I am blind follower of his, but because I can see, where he takes his inspiration from. Nolan's Batman exhists in a very dark, gritty, and realistic Gotham City. And, therefore, his Batman stories tend to reflect the atmosphere of Batman: Year One and also takes story beats from The Long Hallowen. He then picks the villains who best suit his realistic approach or ones that he feels can be tweaked enough to his liking. Is it frustrating that under Nolan we will never see cool villains like Poison Ivy or see Batman ascend to the ranks of the Justice League? Yes, but on the other hand, Batman Begins gave us 2 really cool villains from the comics in the form of Scarecrow and Ras Al Ghul, and those guys had never been in a movie before. Then Nolan topped himself, giving us the best takes on Two Face and the Joker that we will probably ever see. And let's not forget that Nolan ultimately stays true to core of what Batman is; a troubled obsessed crime fighter who will stop at nothing to bring justice to the criminals of Gotham City.
On the other side of the table, we have Marvel Studios releasing individual films that will eventually lead up The Avengers. While the aproach being taken here has come beloved by fans, there are a select few who take issue with a few things. Mainly the fact that the cinematic universe pulls a lot of inspiration from the Ultimate univerese. Everything from Captain America's helmet to the huge presence of S.H.I.E.L.D. accompanying the Avengers has come under scrutiny. Ok. here's my take on that. Classic Marvel lore will always be special, but some of it is just downright campy. I mean look at the costume of Captain America. It looks great in the comic books, but seeing Steve Rogers run around looking like that in the upcoming film would be silly. The WW2 suit he wears in the first Avenger is more realistic with better armor, a helmet, and paratrooper straps. Another complaint about The Avengers is that it may not feature Hank and Janet Pym. Now I understand why purists would be upset. Afterall, Hank and Jan were in the original team's line up and Hank is responsible for creating the Vision and Ultron. But at the same time, I feel as though even they were not in the movie, it would not be a big deal. I mean look, we are getting 3 original team members. Iron Man, Thor and the Hulk. Add fan favorites and essentials like Captain America, Hawkeye, and the Black Widow, and I say this team will rock very hard in multiplexes all over the world. Plus adding in Maria Hill who only debuted a few years ago in the comics and Agent Coulson who was created for the movies and of course the Ultimate Universe version of Nick Fury just make this movie all the cooler. Some fans may complain that film does not resemble the original Avengers, but I say that mixing and matching is the best way to get good results.
But then you have franchise like X-Men from FOX which does mixing and matching to the max. I mean as far as I can see, Xavier, Beast and Magneto are the only people from the original comic. None of the others are original first class members in the comics. Plus in the current comics, Cyclops has taken up Xavier's role. In the movies, though, Cyclops is dead as is Xavier, leaving Storm and Wolverine to lead the team. Oh, and Xavier is still alive in the comics. Lets also not forget that in the comics Wolverine was an unwilling participant of Weapon X who upon his escape from that facility killed everyone inside. In the movies, he volunteers for the adamantium procedure, and escapes from the facility without shedding a drop of blood from anyone. FAIL! Look, I understand, things need to be changed and omitted when adapting huge comic franchises into movies. But, when this much gets changed, you have to wonder how much FOX cares about the fans as opposed to just putting a franchise out called X-Men.
Then you have comics like Watchmen, 300, and Sin City. Unlike other comic book movies which pull from different stories and eras, these stories made onto the screen with little to no changes, and really this was the best way to. Why? Because these comics were written to be self contained. They don't have years of continuity to sift through. There would no reason to change them because they are for the most part, one shots.
So at the end of the day, sometimes mixing and matching is good. Sometimes it's abused for the sake of marketing and just putting out a blockbuster. And sometimes, it is not needded at all. I learned long ago to accept change because I knew that not every detail on the printed page can o r should be on film. And for the most part, these changes, additions and omitions did not affect the core of the characters being portrayed. Therefore I'm happy. Because I want CBMs to flourish, and when one comes out, I'm gratefull. X-Men is one of the acceptions when it comes to abuse of source material. For the most part, characters from comics are making the transtition to movies quite nicely, and I couldnt be happier.