That is, when our cherished and adored whatever makes it BIG time, what are we really hoping for? A perfect and seemless translation of our own charming adoration? A big box office take for the creators? An interpretation, knowing full well we can't get EXACTLY what we loved so much?
Sin City is pretty darn literal, as were chunks of Daredevil. Hitchhiker's Guide is a requisite abbreviation, but currently maligned. X-Men and Spiderman split the pastures, but with most in the "grass isn't greener" camp.
The stuff I love I wish others would appreciate as much as I do, but I know I bring my own experience, my own reception, my own EYES to the information.

When it comes to movies I find its easier to be true to the original comic when the comic has a finite structure...like SIN CITY.

Its harder to do the same for say Spidey because they have to take bits and pieces from his long history to make it fit in a 2 hour story..I mean I doubt we would have enjoyed Spiderman the movie as much if it was a 15 minute short film that had Spidey vs the burglar or spidey vs the Chameleon and them stinkin commies:)

Same with Superman..I loved the Donner flic but to work you had to take bits and pieces of Superman's long history...or else you get a movie where Supes fights and evil landlord and a weapons dealer:)

Something like Next men or Planetary can be translated literally to the screen.

When it comes to enjoyment I have to admit I like it when the spirit is true to the originals but we get a new story...I liked the Spidey flics..but I felt that I knew all the plot beats...Xmen and X2 was more entertaining to me.

So basically characters true to the spirit but with some new exciting plots (for a new medium after all)!

Actually that being said..I really enjoyed SIN CITY despite knowing the whole story in advance..so go figure...(part of thought it was cool that so many people are digging it and may get into the comics that ive been loving for so long...!

Maybe if Miller penned a new SIN CITY tale for the sequel Id enjoy it even more...who knows?

Woof. That gets mah vote! Release the comic and the moobie at the same time?

I basically agree with Vouleris there. As long as the spirit/essence/core of the source material is there, I'm happy. The Spidey and X-Men movies did that for me, as did the LOTR trilogy. DAREDEVIL and HI;L didn't, ELEKTRA doesn't look like it will, and then there's CATWOMAN...

As for SIN CITY, the creator of the source material was so involved with the adaptation, how could it go wrong?

It was funny, because watching the movie I wasn't sure if Rosario Dawson was right for Gail, but then I realized that if Frank Miller thought she fit the part, who am I to argue? (Personal interepretations notwithstanding.)

And Dave Stevens' involvement with the Rocketeer! Good points, all.
And I totally saw Rosario Dawson there. She was perfect.

I think the one requirement of an adaptation is that it's good, even if it takes a good number of liberties with the source material.

Way I see it, a good movie (or TV show or whatever) will have folks seeking out the original... which they will like or dislike on its merits. If it's bad, then it's unlikely they'd bother to check out the original.

And I think there's something to be said for an adaptation that takes certain liberties with the plot. Usually if a movie is too faithful, I need to experience it *before* I read the book to truly enjoy both. A novel usually adds a layer of depth to the movie experience, whereas a movie only supplies the thrill of "seeing it on the screen".

And I can think of a couple of movies (Misery and The Firm) which improved the story by deviating from the plot. In Misery, the writer publishing the book that he wrote under duress seemed more than a bit silly and that was thankfully excised from the movie; while in The Firm, they actually provided an ending the fulfilled the lead character's stated requirements for resolution: that he be able to continue practicing law and doesn't have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life.

"Michael Nebeker IS the Green Hornet!"

That's what I want to see in an adaptation.

Someday, Linda.

Interesting points - I thought I'd add my $0.02 (Canadian, of course)

I had a discussion with the owner of my LCS about Sin City, and he was saying it was the only time he had ever seen a comic book movie actually lead to more people coming in to buy the book. He never had this happen with Spidey, X-flicks, and whatnot; I find this very interesting.

I loved the Crow (the first one - I did like the second, but also got why most folks hated it; let's not even discuss the third one and the TV show...), and only recently (in the past two years I think) got around to buying the original graphic novel. Overall, I was actually happier with the movie (it was more focussed, with decidedly less naval-gazing - I totally get why there was that much more introspection in the book, and really like the book for what it is - the movie just tells a more compelling story).

Tank Girl. LOVED the movie. A while after (about a year or so) it came out, I finally read some of the original books, and could see why some comic fans were kinda pissed about the movie. Still, I liked both, but as separate entities....

Blade. I never gave a damn about the character before the first movie came out; now, I own the first three Essential Tomb of Dracula collections (I'll be grabbing the fourth soon), and realize how cool the character is/was back in the day.

...so far, all these movies are working quite well as really big adverts (to me anyway)...which is all they really have to be, I suppose...

The first two Batman films (heck, even Batman Forever to a small extent) were an interesting enough interpretation of the character; they didn't get me to read the books any more than I was already (which wasn't too much at the time, admittedly - 'Kingdom Come' did far more to get me into reading Bat-books than any movie ever did).

I love the Spidey and X-flicks, but they don't get me reading the Spidey and X-books either.


...

Here is an interesting variation on this however; have you ever enjoyed any comic book adaptation of a movie? And what would that be?

Universally, I've HATED every comic adaptation of a movie that I have ever read. Each and every one of them!! I find that they never transfer well (I found the Star Wars books were only enjoyable when they were no longer telling the stories from the movies, for example), even when the art matches the movie (the comic adaptation of Burtons' Batman film is a perfect example of this - the pictures were very pretty, but the characters did not move at all. They might as well have just made it one of those old Photonovels!).

I was talking to one of the guys at my LCS last week about Sin City, he said they'd sold 10 complete sets of the graphic novels since the movie had come out. I know my first impulse after I saw it was to head over to the shop and check them out.

Yeah, same effect here, too, but its not the ONLY time they got more interest, from a comic book moobie.

Would have happened already if only you'd have dropped that "fidelity to the source" nonsense and let them reimagine Kato as a Norwegian like the movie studio wanted to ...

Ian - The XMen movie got me wanting to read (or reread) some Xmen tales. I remember when the Burton Batman flic came out - I worked at a comic store...there was a feeding frenzy of Batman sales that year.

Blade the movie had me hankering for more Blade comics..as did Sin City.

Comic Adaptations...meh...the original Star wars trilogy had some cool adaptation from Marvel back in the day.

I really enjoyed some of the Dark Horse "unoficial sequels" of great flics in comic form: the Terminator series had some great stories by Matt Wagner, James Robinson, Paul Gulacy.

It is good to know that the crossover promotion does work in comics favour from time to time; anything that gets 'mundanes' into comic shops to be turned into comic fans is a good thing

JV, it's spooky how much we have in common. I was also working in a comic shop when the first Burton "Batman" flic hit, and "feeding frenzy" is a good way to describe the sales of all the "bat-paraphenalia" that we sold that summer. I was living in Las Vegas at the time and the "summer of the Bat" provided me with my favorite Vegas story:

One afternoon this guy walks into my shop and starts loading up on all of the Batman stuff he can get his hands on: Cups, posters, t-shirts, keychains, buttons, etc. (no comics, though) Anyways, the guy drops somewhere in the neighborhood of $200 on all this stuff and the whole time he's picking it up he's talking about how he didn't hold on to all the Batman stuff he bought in the sixties and how this time he was gonna make sure to hold onto it so it would be worth something in another 20 years, then he says he just doesn't understand how some people can get so obsessed with something like Batman....

So I said "Yeah some people do get obsessive with it." Then I knowingly asked him "Say, what do you do for a living?"

"I'm an Elvis Impersonator at [The Sands*]." he says.

The funny thing is, he *looked* like what you'd expect Elvis to look like on his day off. He had the hair, the sideburns and the sunglasses, but the hair was a little mussed, he had five-o-clock shadow, he was wearing casual clothes. He pulled up to the shop in big, gold Caddy with a lisense plate that read "THA KING"...

Truly a surreal moment.


* I have long ago forgotten which hotel he was working for

Frank - thats funny...hey maybe it was the KING himself:)

I think the Sands needs a Batman impersonator.



...or maybe the Red Bee....

I've often wondered that very same thing...

Wasent the KING a comic book fan? Captain Marvel fan at least right?

Plus if he was still alive..wouldnt being an Elvis impersonator be the best possible cover..???

The real deal breaker was when they started talks with Halle Berry.