Currently Online 
LurkerJ said:
|
1. it doesn't have to be beneficial. It doesn't have to affect it negatively. You insist it would and your reasoning? the source material. Which we already established no one gives a shit about as proven by the movies that generate billions of dollars despite beind different. You care? don't watch, simple.
If it doesn't effect the story in any way, then it is a pointless change, and shitty writing. And no, we didn't establish that you can just chuck the source material to the wind and still have success. Most of the movies that are making billions are keeping most of the source material.
And, if you actually read what I said, I did not say anything about never changing the source material. I said that you have to have a reason to change the source material.
2. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. That some people will like it and some won't? Yes, and I won't like it. That's why I'm complaining about it. That's what we call "expressing your opinion". And saying "tough" is not any sort of meaningful response. It's just saying that you don't care about my opinion, and you don't have to. If you don't, that's fine, but when you're posting in an opinion based topic, it's kind of a pointless. Basically the equivelent of shoving your fingers in your ears.
3. You keep saying this and it's ridiculous every time. First of all, who cares how much money they're making? Unless you're a Marvel executive, that is completely meaningless. The amount of money they make has nothing to do with the quality of the movie. And even if it did, this is still an incredibly dumb point, because to make it meaningful, you'd have to isolate the variable (change from source material) compare it to how much money the films are making, and then analyze how changing the source material impacts things. And even then you're be left with a stupid argument, because each change would have to be viewed differently. Making the Vision based on Jarvis and not Wonderman won't necessarily have the same impact as making Spider-man pansexual.
The trend in comic book movies has actually been moving closer to the source material. The new batman movies are far closer to the source than the older onese, and have made more money. Marvel's incarnations of their characters tend to be far more closely linked to the source material than movies made by fox and Sony and have been making a lot more money. We have movies like Catwoman, Fantastic 4, and Daredevil that completely ignore their source material, and bomb.
So what data do you have to suggest that changing source material does not influence ticket sales, and better yet, why should we care about how much money the movie makes in the context of this conversation?
4. Since you went with a complete non-sequitor instead of addressing the point regarding the human torch, I'm going to guess you have nothing intelligent to say on the matter. Skin color and sexuality are not the same thing. One has an inherrent impact on how you act, and one does not.
