I just saw Iron Man 3. Last summer, The Dark Knight Rises created a heated debate among comic book fans. Iron Man 3 has already stirred this “purist” pot. Deviation from source material, prevalent in these two popular films, has become the loudest complaint. While hardcore fans have been bashing these movies, general audiences are praising them.
This raises the question of how important the source should be in a comic book adaptation. Because of its ending, The Dark Knight Rises has taken heavy fire from comic book purists, who express displeasure at the thought of Bruce Wayne retiring. However, the ending explores new ground and enforces a new message about Batman: he’s a symbol. Whether the campy Adam West television series or the brutality of a Frank Miller novel, Batman is an enduring cultural icon. Everyone knows Batman, everyone loves Batman. How is this ending bad?
This is fresh; this is new.
Some say that a better ending would be to have Bruce redeem himself to Gotham City and continue his career as Batman, seemingly forever. While this could have been a good ending, the only problem is that it’s too familiar; we’ve seen it before. In countless other stories we’ve seen Batman rise above adversity and continue to fight another day, and if Christopher Nolan had stuck with the familiar then we would not have received such a fresh and symbolic message that shows a deep understanding of this character’s popularity.
Purists have also expressed disappointment with Iron Man 3 because of how the Mandarin was handled. In the film we were given a different version of the Mandarin in Aldrich Killian, a scientist who manipulates the war on terror by creating a stereotypical extremist. This is arguably more threatening than the traditional version because he chooses to manipulate from behind the scenes rather than taking a direct approach. It makes one think: what if the truly evil men in this world are not the ones who make a scene, but the ones who work subtly? The point made by this “bait-and-switch” is intriguing, and provides a new idea not usually present in comic book movies.
This is new; this is great.
An article by rgaona from ComicBookMovie gives another interesting viewpoint: what if this version of the Mandarin was created to play with our expectations? According to rgaona, a white guy, enforcing a stereotype, created the original, comic book Mandarin to spread fear of Chinese communism during the Cold War. Likewise, in Iron Man 3 a white guy, enforcing a stereotype, created the Mandarin to spread fear throughout the United States of a new terrorist. “The film made us come face to face with those biases and expectations, and showed how a smart enemy could subvert our expectations and use us without us realizing it until it’s too late.” Rgaona understands the brilliance of Shane Black’s move, which shows a profound comprehension of the character’s history, while exploring new territory.
Whether one likes this Mandarin or not, they should at least appreciate the idea behind him. Comic book characters can be adapted to a variety of different forms; the comics themselves having radically different tones depending on when they were published. Why should a film adaptation have to stick to an already existing interpretation instead of creating a new one? If we have the same versions over and over again, that becomes boring. We would see the same conflicts and character studies countless times, with nothing original being covered. Why not bring in something else? Why not experiment? Change is great, and whether one likes it or not, they should at least appreciate it when it happens.
This is great; this is art.
Art plays with our expectations; it keeps us guessing, and gives us fresh, new, and original material. In the same way that Heath Ledger blew away our expectations with his portrayal of the Joker, The Dark Knight Rises and Iron Man 3 destroy our expectations by giving us fresh and original material. If Christopher Nolan and Shane Black had stuck with what we expect, what we’re familiar with, their films would have been shallow and pedantic, nothing more than a cheap imitation of pre-existing material. Sure, their films could have been enjoyable for a short while, but they would not have made a significant impact, or even been exciting. The Dark Knight Rises is still being talked about almost a year after its release and Iron Man 3 has a considerable chance of being argued over for years to come.
Imitation is boring; art is exciting. Which one do you prefer?
Ultimately, there are no definitive versions of these characters. Yes, there are popular versions, but they are not sacred, and all adaptations should not have to hold up to them. Instead of complaining about how a filmmaker “butchered” our favorite character, we should relax, understand our favorite version is not everyone else’s, and appreciate this new interpretation we’ve been given. Source accuracy is not as important as we make it out to be, and when a film plays with our expectations by giving us fresh material, it has a greater chance of making a significant impact.
This is what makes a film great.
But if you want complete and total accuracy, you could just skip the theater and read the comics.