Quote:
Originally Posted by Roiffalo
Oh those who don't know the original want it to stick to the original too! Example:
I didn't have comic book access or money to get them growing up, so I watched the cartoons I could and the movies they put out. The shows weren't a lot since I didn't have many channels, but my dad loves collecting movies, and he happens to like the super hero genre, so he bought them and that was about 93% of my comic book character experience (at least growing up).
One in particular I remember was Toby Maguire's Spider-Man. In the movie his shooters weren't home made or developed by him or any form of science that showed off his genius. They came OUT OF HIM. As far as I knew, this was accurate. And when I saw the recent reboot, I felt like a fucking idiot. So much of the movie I couldn't stay focused on because I was still stuck on this stupid fact I was never privy to with my weak exposure to comic books.
I do more digging these days when watching super hero movies. I read some comics when I have money to buy one or two (although they're always Hulk or Werewolf related, because priorities), I browse the net looking for back info when I want to know more, and if I watch cartoons (and especially movies) I check my facts before taking anything as canon because I am not making that mistake again. Older cartoons are usually more reliable.
[/rant]
|
Im more like you in that sense... I got 90% of my info from the cartoons, as wasnt a big comic book buyer/reader. The early cartoons were 100% cannon, and most up till now are accurate too.
Its Hollywood film that has a long history of destroying original stories and cannons.
Spiderman shooting webs from his own body is a horrible change because one, he's a scientist -- who can change the formula and mechanics to match the foe and situation, and two, there are exciting moments when he runs out of web, and has to get creative. How shortsighted do you have to be to give up that story device?