Comicscape - March 17, 2004

By: Tony Whitt
Date: Wednesday, March 17, 2004

OPINION:

I've only recently become familiar with John Constantine, the lead character in Vertigo's longest-running series to date, HELLBLAZER. Even so, I was appalled to hear the changes that were being made to the character to bring him to the screen - and all because Keanu Reeves, whose love children I would normally be more than happy to bear, is playing Constantine. Instead of a blond smoker with a thick English accent based in London, he's going to be a dark-haired, California accented American living in (where else?) California. He's also supposed to be using a "holy shotgun," which has led at least one on-line commentator to quip that we'll be seeing the fabled Holy Hand Grenade before this is all over. This is really about all I've heard, but if even that much is accurate, it's bound to cause changes in the rest of Constantine's story that will render it almost unrecognizable. If I'm appalled, I can only imagine what long-term fans must be feeling.

Then again, as comics fans, we're so used to the movies screwing up the comics they adapt that we're shocked (and ecstatically pleased) when they get anything right. And when you stop to think about it, it's downright peculiar. By rights, adapting stories from one visual medium into another shouldn't be so difficult, but it's far more common to see a bad comics movie than a good one. When you attempt to examine the reasons why even such qualified successes as SUPERMAN, BATMAN, X-MEN, and SPIDER-MAN make changes to certain elements considered key to those characters, it becomes clear that there's a number of factors that keep the comic book from being completely translatable to the big screen:

1. THE ACTOR FACTOR: Suppose you're a director planning a big screen version of, say, HELLBLAZER and you want to stay true to the character as presented in the comic. You're hoping to cast some hitherto unknown British actor who can capture John Constantine perfectly. Then the studio tells you that they want

you to cast Keanu Reeves. That's a problem. For one thing, he's not British - as anyone who watched Francis Ford Coppola's version of DRACULA can tell you, he can't play British, either. The studio may not have had as much of a say in Tim Burton's casting of Michael Keaton in BATMAN, of course, but the casting did change certain elements of the character we usually take as read. Bruce Wayne is a suave and handsome millionaire playboy. Michael Keaton, while very cute, looks like he snuck in with the wait staff. And don't even get me started on Sean Connery as Allan Quartermain - even Quartermain described himself as a cowardly sort long before Alan Moore came along and explored that bit of his character, but try asking Connery to play someone who would describe himself as a coward. The casting of a single actor can take a comics character down a path that no one would have expected him (or her - think Jennifer Garner as Elektra this time) to take. Sometimes the effect is miraculous, and sometimes the effect is...less than miraculous. For every Michael Keaton, we get a Tommy Lee Jones. For every Patrick Stewart, we get a Halle Berry. Twice, even. Thus the concept changes.

2. THE DIRECTOR FACTOR: Speaking of miraculous, it is nothing less than a miracle that Tim Burton made such a success of the first BATMAN movie given that unusual piece of casting (and no, I don't mean that odd man in the clown makeup). But Burton has a bit of a thing for the bizarre, shall we say, and thus we soon get BATMAN RETURNS. First off, let me just say that, if Ed Brubaker were writing his version of CATWOMAN back

in 1992 and a director other than Burton had decided to introduce that Selena Kyle into the BATMAN franchise, I have no doubts that Michelle Pfeiffer could have played that version of Selena beautifully. But Ed wasn't writing for Selena then, and Burton was at the helm. Thus we get an absolutely bizarre origin story for Catwoman - if you haven't watched it, I envy you, but it's just too strange to try to summarize here - in addition to a version of the Penguin that is so far from the original that it's amazing they kept the name. Again, Danny DeVito as Cobblepott, as written by Brubaker? Superb casting - DeVito's natural sense of humor would have been perfect for the character. But under Burton's control, the Penguin character changes into something so repulsive and so humorless that DeVito is wasted in the role.

While we're on the BATMAN franchise, we might as well talk about how the director factor continues to hobble that series of films when Joel Schumacher takes the helm. The fact that he expressed such admiration for the BATMAN show from the 60s should have been an early warning for anyone, but moviegoers were still amazed at how campy, over-the-top, and...well, gay the next two movies were. Thus we get a Riddler who's not the most masculine sort of fellow and just a little too much attention paid to Val Kimmer's butt. (This isn't a case of homophobia, by the way - with me, it's more a case of "it takes one to know one.") Then the Director Factor and the Actor Factor combine to give us Arnold Schwarzenager as Mister Freeze, a role that should have more properly gone to Patrick Stewart - that is, if Schumacher were at all interested in being true to the comic.

Occasionally the Director Factor works in a film's favor - to an extent, anyway. For example, we get Ang Lee directing THE HULK, resulting in a far more psychologically complex film than we might have gotten had he stuck to the "Hulk Smash!" concept, or even the Bruce Banner as fugitive concept. But we also get Banner's father, who we know next to nothing about in the original comics, and we get not a single mention of Rick Jones (though this may have other reasoning behind it - see below.) Thus the concept changes.

3. THE STUDIO FACTOR: (Surely you didn't think they'd all rhyme with "factor," did you?) This one, of course, combines with the other two most of the time, but on other occasions it's the studio that decides that this element or that is simply not right for a movie version, even if it's dead-on accurate for the comic. I recall a column that Peter David once wrote (and bear in mind I haven't that column in front of me, so none of this is a direct "quote") in which he and Kyle Baker were discussing Kyle's experience talking to a group of studio execs about a possible movie version of WHY I HATE SATURN. David was both amused and horrified to hear that yes, indeed, the execs had asked him, "Why does it have to be Saturn? Why can't it be Jupiter, or something sexier?" We should all thank our lucky stars - or in this case, planets - that Baker stuck to his guns on this one, as even a change like that, which seems oh so minor to the studios, would have hobbled the original concept.

For a more extreme example of the Studio Factor (this time posing as the Producer Factor), rent AN EVENING WITH KEVIN SMITH on DVD sometime. It's brilliant, for one thing. Another reason to rent it, though, is Kevin's story about producer Jon Peters

with whom Kevin had preliminary talks with about directing a new SUPERMAN movie. The long and the short of it is that Peters wanted a climactic final battle between Supes and - wait for it - a giant spider. Peters, according to Smith, was obsessed with the idea of having a giant spider in the movie, even though Superman's never had much to do with giant spiders, really. (It should come as no surprise, of course, that said giant spider finally appeared in WILD WILD WEST, which is yet another instance of the Studio Factor - combined with the Actor Factor in the person of Will Smith, who has to have a rap song in every movie he's in, whether it fits or not - fundamentally changing a great original concept. But I digress. Lord, do I digress.) The studio comes in, asks for a few "minor alterations," and the result is a well-known storyline and character twisted out of all recognition. Thus the concept changes.

4. THE PLOT FACTOR: This one's a bit difficult to explain, but it all comes down to the fact that the very plot of some series, miniseries, graphic novels, or what have you, is simply too complex to condense into a 90 minute-to-two hour time slot. Sometimes it's better to expand that time slot to give the concept breathing room, but even then things change (see below). Most of the time, it's easier simply to change the original plot. Read Alan Moore's FROM HELL sometime, then go and rent

the movie - or better yet, rent the movie first and then read the book, as I did. The difference is astounding. The Hughes Brothers' film is a creepy little piece of cinema with wonderful performances by Johnny Depp and Heather Graham as Inspector Abberline and Mary Kelly, respectively, and Ian Holm is absolutely terrifying. But none of the characters in the movie bear any resemblance to the characters in the book, despite the latter characters being based on historical figures. Depp's Abberline is a young man with psychic abilities who likes to hit the Victorian version of the crack pipe a bit too often, for instance, while the "real" Abberline in the book is a middle-aged married man with nary a vice in his soul, save swearing like a sailor. This may sound like the Actor Factor in effect, but a look at the rest of the movie shows that the Hughes obsessively read and understood the original book - certain scenes are almost shot for shot how they appear in the novel. There's just too much damn plot in the book to fit into two hours, or even three. A miniseries could possibly have done it justice, but a standard movie never could.

Come to think of it, every Moore book that has made it to the big screen is hobbled by this problem - mainly because Moore's books are, without exception, some of the most complex comics plots ever written. People often wonder why WATCHMEN has yet to be brought to the screen, for example - but if it were, most of us would never stop throwing up. As it happened, we did get LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN, adapted by no less than STARMAN scribe James Robinson. In a complete bastardization of Moore's original plot, Quartermain transforms from a weak opium addict into a Victorian-era James Bond; Mina Murray transforms from a vampire victim and the team's leader into a true vampire who answers to Quartermain's leadership; and the Invisible Man transforms from a sociopath named Griffin to a fairly decent guy named Skinner, without a single shred of the original homicidal maniac Griffin in sight - erm, so to speak. On top of that, we get a villain who never appeared in the book (more on that below), a hero who turns out to be a villain who never appeared in the book, and a hero who not only never appeared in the book but who would be far, far older in the movie if his "actual" literary age had been stuck to. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Problem is, we can't (and shouldn't) blame Robinson for this - if anyone, the blame should be placed on Moore for creating such complex characters and such a complex plot that they can't be translated to anything shorter than a 13-hour miniseries. In that script, Robinson writes the best movie he can given the limits placed on him by the form and the law (again, see below). If you've not read the book, it's not such a bad movie - Kevin O'Neill, the artist on the original series, gave the movie high praise, in fact. But those of us who saw it and who had read the book couldn't see anything to praise.

I could easily go on about this one factor alone, as it's the single biggest hobbler of any attempt to get a comic on the screen - do a web search sometime and find the synopsis of the SANDMAN movie treatment that's been floating around for years to get what may be the single most extreme example - but it's enough to say this: FROM HELL is a good book. FROM HELL is a good movie. And never the two shall meet. Thus the concept changes.

And finally, 5. THE FIDDLY BITS FACTOR. (Sorry, it was the best I could come up with on such short notice.) Occasionally there will be some element in a comic character's continuity, origin, or accoutrements that simply doesn't work on screen, or which just isn't worth the trouble to fiddle with to make it work. Hence, fiddly bits. See? For instance, fans (myself among them, initially)

screamed bloody murder at the thought that Peter Parker's webbing in SPIDER-MAN would be organically produced by his body rather than being a formula invented by Peter and loaded up into mechanical web-shooters. But the fact is that mechanical web-shooters would simply have been impractical, and most likely they would have looked like crap. Think back to the web-shooters created for the brief television series based on the character in the late 70s. Sure, we need not have seen something so bulky for the movie, but think back on how long that movie is already, and just how much of the Spider-Man mythos it manages to fit (and pretty successfully, too) into its two hours and one minute length. It would simply have taken far too long to show Peter inventing the formula, creating the shooters, testing them, et cetera, et cetera... Besides, the organic webbing makes perfect sense given Peter's other physical transformations, and in the context of the movie it works brilliantly. I won't defend the changes to the Green Goblin, though - that was just dumb. Still, that particular problem comes from the same source as the organic webbing - how on Earth are you going to explain a villain who makes up a bizarre Hallowe'en costume to run around in without adding on another five minutes or so to make room for the backstory?

There are other types of fiddly bits, of course, such as the inability of the filmmakers to get the rights to use something that came up in the original comic: Sax Rohmer's estate refused Alan Moore the right to use Fu Manchu's name in the original version of LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN, even though we all knew that's who "The Doctor" was, but such a name change would have been nigh impossible to get around in a film version. Such coyness as only seeing the Doctor's eyes works well in comics, but it doesn't play so well in Peoria anymore. Or the original plot element is so incredibly difficult to realize in full motion and sound that the closest possible approximation must be used. The Phantom Zone as presented in all those Silver Age comics looks pretty damned cool, but it would have looked terrible on the big screen. A rotating mirror flying through space, with three people trapped inside it, though, looks pretty damned cool up there. (I think so, anyway.) The Bottle City of Kandor concept brings up too many difficult questions about Krypton, the absence of Brainiac in the SUPERMAN movie franchise, and so forth to bring Kandor to the screen unchanged, so the studio does...well, whatever it was they did in SUPERGIRL (the details have always been a bit fuzzy to me, and the movie is just too awful to watch more than once, so I haven't actually seen it since 1984). Thus the concept changes.

These factors combine all the time, of course - as good a movie as X-MEN is, the changes wrought to the original concept can in equal measure be attributed to the Actor Factor (Jean and Scott are how many years apart in age again?), the Director Factor (luckily, Bryan Singer is better informed about his source

material than most), the Plot Factor (could the post-Claremont era, or even the pre-Claremont era X-Men really have been brought to the screen in under two hours?), and the Fiddly Bits Factor ("You actually go outside in these things?" "What would you prefer? Yellow spandex?"). With such combinations always actively working against the faithful adaptation of comics to the big screen, we should be grateful we've gotten as many good comic book movies as we have, and we should brace ourselves for whatever atrocities we may still be subjected to. Just remember: for every BATMAN, there's a DAREDEVIL. For every X-MEN, there's a SUPERGIRL. We've got SPIDER-MAN 2, HELLBOY, and THE PUNISHER coming upon us with extreme quickness, with movies such as Y: THE LAST MAN, CATWOMAN, and SWORD OF DRACULA soon to follow. While we can only hope that the future will bring us some more comic book movies that shine, we must be prepared for the possibility that we're just as likely to get another batch that suck.

As usual, I'd love to hear your thoughts on all this, so send your praise and your mutterings to me via the web site contact address here or to me directly. And as always, don't forget our discussion boards. Next week, I'll talk about what I consider the top ten comic books that should be adapted to the big screen (if I can think of ten, and if they haven't been optioned already - feel free to chime in with some suggestions). But first, a listing of the must-have books and the must-burn-on-a-bonfire books:

THIS WEEK:

Dark Horse

sends out all sorts of goodies this week, including GO BOY 7: HUMAN ACTION MACHINE #5; the HELLSING VOL 2 trade paperback for $13.95; and the STEVE RUDE: THE MOTH DOUBLE SIZED SPECIAL. But if you're not reading Joss Whedon's TALES OF THE VAMPIRES #4, then you should turn in your comics fan membership card.

Ah, the many faces of Superman. This week we get a Kal-El still on Krypton in ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN #626; we get a Kal-El just learning he's Kal-El (and the kickoff of something called a "cross media event"?) in SMALLVILLE #7; and we get a Clark Kent who thinks he's Kal-El but he just has the powers of Kal-El in SUPERMAN: SECRET IDENTITY #3 (Of 4). Confusing, innit?

I'm not trying to piss anyone off by putting Thor under Superman - again - honestly, I'm not. So anyway...The "Gods and Men" mess continues in THOR #76. Anyone who's simply sick of that can instead pick up THOR: SON OF ASGARD #1 (Of 6), written by manga writer Akira Yoshida and illustrated by new artist Greg Tocchini, which tells the story of Thor's early days as a young god. (Wasn't this supposed to be out last week?)

From Image comes the latest issue in the seemingly interminable saga of SPAWN, issue #133. If that's not enough to stimulate your cardiac organ, you can buy STREET FIGHTER #6 with three different covers. I wouldn't.

Something's fishy in AQUAMAN #16 - sorry, I will try never to say that again - in which Arthur discovers a survivor from San Diego after half of it has plunged into the sea...several days later. Must have been one hell of an aqualung.

The

Batman Fans get something for all ages this week: the kids get BATMAN ADVENTURES #12; the slightly older kids get ROBIN #124 (unless something naughty happens in it, in which case they get nothing); the even older kids get BATMAN: GOTHAM KNIGHTS #51, but only if they hush...Ouch. Even I thought that was bad...; and for the parents (mostly likely the daddies), there's the CATWOMAN: THE DARK END OF THE STREET trade paperback for $14.95. These guidelines are only guidelines, mind you, and any emotional shocks you may get from reading comics inappropriate to your age group, intelligence, or sexual orientation is entirely your own fault.

We were talking above about what makes comic movies suck, but apart from one little mention, I just couldn't bear into go into talking about the DAREDEVIL movie. However, had they gotten Brian Michael Bendis to write the script, they might have gotten something like DAREDEVIL #58, or the DAREDEVIL VOL 6: LOWLIFE trade paperback on sale for $13.99, or the DAREDEVIL VOL 8: ECHO VISION QUEST trade paperback selling for $13.99. (Naturally, being from Hollywood, the studios would've paid more.) I'm sure reading ELEKTRA #34 would also have made them realize that, while Jennifer Garner is a great Sydney Bristow, she's about as Greek as a pickled turnip.

And as for movies we're all crossing our fingers about...PUNISHER: THE MOVIE #3 (Of 3) comes out this week, adapted by the ever talented Peter Milligan. Of course, since this is out so much earlier than the movie, if you feel the storyline sucks, you don't have to go, and Marvel still gets some money out of it. Cool how that works out, isn't it?

You're missing the best comic DC has put out so far this year. You realize that, don't you? And no, I don't mean SCOOBY-DOO... DC: THE NEW FRONTIER #3 (Of 6) is out this week for $6.95. Ah, the power of Darwyn Cooke...

In

the "real" world, JMS has Peter delving deeper into the mystic side of his origins in AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #505 (or #64, if you're still pathetic), while in the "other" world, BMB has Peter delving into the reasons why a certain studio is making a movie about him in ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN #55. Doc Ock's in it, too - but then, isn't he in everything nowadays?

Rose is still out for revenge in ROSE AND THORN #4 (Of 6), but I'm sure the cover's a bit more important to some people. Sexually deviant and mentally twisted people, mind you, but people nonetheless.

Oh, yeah, and speaking of mentally twisted people... While Genis may not look, act, or sound crazy anymore as he tries to solve the mystery of Marlo's death (before she dies, of course) in CAPTAIN MARVEL #21, you can see him in all his manic-homicidal glory in the CAPTAIN MARVEL VOL 3: CRAZY LIKE A FOX trade paperback for $14.99.

Raven's back in TEEN TITANS #9. Don't know who that is yet? No worries, since the first seven issues of this series will be collected at the end of the month. Might as well wait.

In FANTASTIC FOUR #511 (and for pedants, it's #82), the team meets God. No, not Stan Lee. The events that led them to this major event are (mostly) collected in the FANTASTIC FOUR VOL 3: AUTHORITATIVE ACTION trade paperback for $12.99.

We find out why Veronica Cale hates Diana so much in WONDER WOMAN #202. But honestly - this is Diana we're talking about, who's beautiful, well-loved, intelligent, and respected. What's not for a woman like Cale to hate?

I think I was lied to when I was told that HULK: GRAY #6 (Of 6) would be out this week, so check for it but don't expect it. As far as I know, HULK: NIGHTMERICA #6 (Of 6) is out this week, but don't get pissy if it isn't. You're getting this info for free, after all.

CrossGen's

got ABADAZAD #2, ROUTE 666 #21,
KISS KISS BANG BANG #3, and THE PATH #23 coming your way. Are they still in a shared universe? Are they not in a shared universe? Only their hairdresser knows for sure.

Wouldn't you know it - Marvel puts out a good series, then they only let it run twelve issues. Business as usual, I suspect. Anyway, INHUMANS #11 is out this week, and my sources say that #12 is out next week. They could be wrong, though - much in the same way Marvel is for doing away with this title.

And speaking of "wrong"...Slave Labor Graphics is re-releasing Jhonen Vasquez's FILLER BUNNY #2: REVENGE OF THE FILLER BUNNY and SQUEE #2. A friend of mine said he had to buy a stuffed bunny and take care of it for a week after reading the former one, so it must be good. They've also got EVENFALL #6 and GLOOMCOOKIE #19 coming out, but who needs those when you've got Filler Bunny?

The world is about to end in RUNAWAYS #13. No, it's not getting cancelled - Marvel has some sense, after all. Just buy it and you'll see what I mean.

From Wildstorm this week comes the PLANETARY: CROSSING WORLDS trade paperback for $14.95 and KAMIKAZE #6 (Of 6). No digging in the cushions this week, at least.

Y'know, Keith Giffen can make anything good. Read THANOS #8 this week, and you'll see it's true - especially if you suffered through any of Jim Starlin's run on the title.

Vertigo

fans are going to have to go into hock this week, unless they have all the issues collected in the many trades they're releasing this week. The list includes the 100 BULLETS VOL 6: SIX FEET UNDER THE GUN trade paperback for $12.95; the reissues of the DEATH: AT DEATH'S DOOR softcover for $9.95, the DEATH: THE HIGH COST OF LIVING trade paperback for $12.95, and the DEATH: THE TIME OF YOUR LIFE trade paperback for $12.95; and the Y: THE LAST MAN VOL 3 - ONE SMALL STEP trade paperback for $12.95. Or you could just buy LUCIFER #48 and save some cash.

And before the big reboot that's going to change everything in the X-Men Universe - again - you can enjoy NEW MUTANTS #10 (which I'm fairly sure is not going to change); NEW X-MEN #154 (which wraps up the "Here Comes Tomorrow" storyline and which will change); WEAPON X #19 (which probably should have changed long ago but which hasn't, and this issue features Wolverine); WOLVERINE #12 (which probably isn't changing, which features Wolverine, and which also features Jean Grey); and X-TREME X-MEN #43 (which thankfully will change completely). Whew. I hate this time of year...

So - which sucky comic movie are you renting tonight?

Questions? Comments? Let us know what you think at comicscape@cinescape.com -- and don't forget to participate in our comic book message forum!

Comicscape is our weekly Comics column.