My Review of Matt McAllisters theories

In this article i am reviewing a article by the above, I see this as a way to try and understand and get insight on the reasons the industry world has turned it's eye on comic book adaptations. And has tried to bridge cult and mainstream to maximise profits.

Films are becomeing all about spectacles, big budgets, big stars, big revenues generated, big explosions... Tries to appear big leaning to bigger is better philosiphy. By spending more on advertising appealing to a global market and by making focus of importance a opening weekend these companies are searching for concepts and characters that are "franchise friendly" with a tendancy to go for

"...the dominance of the action-adventure, special effects-oriented "popcom" thriller."


"one could argue that the style and format of these movies--perhaps exploiting the serialized narrative structure and visual modalities of comics indirectly influenced the episodic and cliffhanger nature of the action film genre,"

THe second quote i feel enphasises the methology carried from comic to film and vice versa. In a sense film benifits from learning new visual styles and stratagies while forcing it's own upon the comics it adapts to its format

"modern comic book-based films have helped establish the industrial formula of the Hollywood popcorn blockbuster: fantastic action movie as cultural event. Comic book materials attract a youthful movie going demographic, appeal to nostalgic older audiences, and offer thrills and well-defined archetype characters, especially heroes who also have well-established track records for popularity, licensing, and sequel potential."

With both a large fanbase and easy transferable characters this quote sums up easily why companys are so keen to include comic and make them into films and media events. THe ability to sequal these as well carrying fans on a forever consuming nature devouring a concept til it has dried out


"Ang Lee-directed Hulk (2003), "the Hulk movie was a study of anger, and people wanted a popcom movie [. . . Our Hulk will be a diet Hulk. Lighter. Focusing on the love story, Hulk as hero, and his battle with the villain" (qtd. in Hammer 112).""

Perhaps the most insulting quote exploring way films sacrifice the characters they buy, the story's and plotlines for a easy selling strategy. In doing so taking a low concept film and making it high concept so it is easier to promote It is clear in this quote there is no regret for loss of character. It has become JUST BUISNESS.
I question the morality of this. In the same article Johnson argues the way the complex and heavily depth character Wolverine in film portrayals has became much more simplistic. Losing the very things that appealed to fans.
This is in a sense a betrayal on the films parts to the base material.

I'd arge that while this article says how film has taken stylistic aproaches, see no further than SIN City it is bastardising it by taking the very reasons products like this are loved and reducing them to nothing more than one more in a never ending comercial machine.


Batman first two films with their theme made sponsorship hard with cross branded work with companies like McDonalds

"hypercommercial Hollywood seems to tolerate sex and violence more than political edginess and character complexity."

This final quote is my key point and problem, Hollywood tollerates, It is not that it cares, it is that it uses what it wants. It doesn't take a product and remakes it, it takes what it wants and puts out what it wants, leaving much out. They'll leave things they dislike out but the very fans that the concept appealed to may possibly be removed.

Peopel like things for different reasons. I like the politix and character complexity of Code Geass, yet by this quote Hollywood would remove the two main interest points of my favourite product were they to make that a film. It would remove what i like to sell it to a world that moves on with films like it devours food or sleeps. Just one more in a neverending cycle.

That is my problem with this, the fans stick with and love the concepts. THe mass audience just see it cause they want to go see another film. They don't care or stick with it. By taking the thing they like and removing best parts of it they are stopping people with most heart for its passion. They remove love of film, and love of a concept for "Bums in Seats" and this is Hollywoods most unforgivable crime.

They use formulayic natures to make it easy to sell as they are afraid, and yes they will lose money, but they forget they are selling art, since when has Art every been about facts and figures. When i left school i had a choice maths or film. Film was always a risk but it is passionate, maths is cold. And that passion comes across and most films i enjoy are ones i can tell were made with love. This stratagy hollywood suggests removes that.