Name: John D
@Conor: I think you picked up a keyword, "adaptation." Are these films adaptation or inspired by, or based on comic/book. I think there's some difference between those terms.
I really never got into The League of Extraoridnary Gentlmen (the comic), I got the first couple of trades - but it just didn't click. Wasn't my thing. Saw the film, and saw that they took something that, while it wasn't my cup o' tea had some merit and worth and shallowed it out and basically made a bad film out of it.
I do think most folks here are taking one simple statement like "ruin a comic" and twisting way beyond what was meant by it. Sadly, now even Conor's playing this game. A poor movie adapation cannot ruin the source material in it's original form. It ruins it in the sense that it take an adapation of the book and doesn't do it justice... it changes the plot/characters/etc. and doesn't give the good source material what it deserves. Rather than give us a good, true adaptation they give us something that was not needed and perhaps could've been much better with a different film maker. ...and yes, we will always have the original, let's beat that dead horse and say someone has "weak convictions."
Now, that all being said... changes are needed and mandated by any transition to different media (mediums?). As I stated earlier, I think the Crow is best comic book film... but, it's world's different from the book. I think those changes worked well and most were needed and stayed very true to the core elements of the story and characters. History of Violence didn't work for me for the same reason - and I think they missed some great oppurtunities - especially since they had a young actor that looked so much like young Viggo.
...and I'm avoiding the troll.
@PaulMontgomery: You're quote was a direct reaction to a statement I said. If you'd like to deny that, fine... but, you were definitely implying something there and now you're backtracking.
I stated that the movie ruined a good comic. I still think it did and my convictions are very strong.... strong enough to stand by something I said and not be a troll.
@PaulMontgomery: well, in a manner of speaking the movie took a good comic and turned it into what I thought was a poor movie. In essence, it ruined a good comic. Doesn't mean the comic itself is any less of a good read. Nothing weak about my convictions and I tend to resent that you'd try to twist my words that way.
@conor: thanks for the answer, kinda what I expected. I read the book first and I think that shaped the expectation I had for the movie... which ultimately led to a let down for me. I also remember reading an interview with the director where he seemed to have little regard for the comic itself.
I want my $3 back. The art was muddy, but decent - everyone tended to look a little too similar. The story was the most contrived, predictable, inane thing I've read in quite some time.
I was so sure this was going to be the iF pick of the way, and am glad that it isn't - that alone, has restored my faith in the guys behind the site. While this book, has shown me that event books are best left unread.
I'm late to this party... just watched the video. But... c'mon the History of Violence movie sucked. The book was pretty damned good and the flick just bastardized it. The Crow is probably, IMO, the best comic book made...
I'd wager you guys saw the History of Violence movie before you read the graphic novel? That might explain it... although, it's not very explainable to me. That movie ruined a good comic, ruined a good comic.
...and you don't know who Vince Locke is??
<a href=http://www.watchmencomicmovie.com/111008-watchmen-movie-zack-snyder-ending-changed.php>Spoilers</a>... this is ruins the movie for me. It makes no sense.
I only wish that they were doing this without Snyder's gimmicky slow motion/cgi schtick. This is such a highly lauded book, the over the top 300 style effects seem to cheapen it to me.
...and why is Christian Bale overdubbing Rorschach??
Still, looks very interesting and am eagerly awaiting this.
I picked this up - mostly because it was a slow week for me. Despite another terrible Alex Ross cover (but, most Ross covers are terrible to my eyes) and the last few issues before this, this one was decent. Didn't waste any time at all explaining, which could be a pro or con depending on how you look at it and got right into it. Decent art, better than what I'm accustomed to seeing in a Supes book lately.
Still - no where near pick of the week material. (Why aren't you reading I Kill Giants?)