This was actually a thread of discussion I just had with Nyangoro that I found fairly interesting. What I've realized recently is that when it comes to adaptations of western and eastern comic books, the fanbases of each have very different expectations and reactions. I think some of our members who may not be very familiar with one or the other (see: stooge) are actually kind of confused about this so i thought i would make a thread and try to analyze why this is.
With western comic books, fans generally aren't very fussed about adaptations sticking as closely as possible to the "source material", ESPECIALLY when it comes to superhero movies (for reasons i'll explain below).
However when it comes to eastern comic books (or in other words, manga), the fans are very passionate about the source material and are very analytical of changes made in adaptations (sometimes, to an admiteddly pretty embarassing degree).
I would personally attribute this to a few factors.
First of all, when it comes to western comic book movies, the majority of them are about superheroes. The majority of the very big ones (Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, etc) have been around for several decades, and have been passed on to a wide variety of artists and writers who have made several changes over a large period of time. While there is an expected characterization for these characters that define them as those characters, there are alternate ones and several variations to the point where one is not really considered any more "legitimate" than the other. In the case of very old superheroes, the original run of these characters by their creators is not usually considered the best version of that character by fans, because the characters were not "fully fleshed out" yet, and because the writing and art of those times are very bland and static compared to how far comic books have come today. People's image of Batman today is much more tied to the works of artists and writers like Neal Adams, Frank Miller, Bruce Timm, etc than Bob Kane or Bill Finger.
The second thing to point out is that most people who are familiar with western comic book characters haven't actually read the "source material". This is because the western comic book market went through very hard times during the late 80's to 90's; very few people actually read comic books nowadays. The mainstream public's attachment to these characters comes from movies, tv shows, toy lines, etc, which are already adaptations in and of themselves. Actual comic book fans are aware of all these issues and conundrums and generally take a more relaxed approach to source material issues because they know that the character has gone through so many changes already that it's just another version of them. They know that you can take a story loosely based on the source material and that it has a good chance of being good anyway.
The exact opposite is true for manga.
Generally speaking, most manga adaptations are of works that have not been around for very long and that aren't super mega franchises which have had several different installments and been tossed around to various different writers. As such, the original creator's take on it is generally considered to be much "truer" than anything else, because it was essentially already a fully fleshed out story and characters (unlike western comic books which had to go through a long period for that to happen). The only japanese manga series off the top of my head that is comparable to a western franchise in the previously mentioned sense is Lupin III, which HAS gone through a lot of adaptations and variations in characterization and design.
Part of the reason manga fans have animosity towards changes is because the original content produced by anime studios based on an established property tends to be noticeably weaker than the content from the original source, if not just downright bad. Anime studios will often create "filler" content to pad out the adaptation until more work from the manga comes in and can be adapted, and generally speaking fans dread these, not necessarily because they "aren't canon" or differ from the source material, but because the effort put into them is generally not much and anime studios have trouble writing on the level of the original author.
A good illustration of this is the first Fullmetal Alchemist anime. It has much the same spirit as many western adaptations of comic books (they take characters, ideas, and plot threads from a source and try to make a work inspired by them, rather than just a straight out faithful adaptation). While there are people that enjoyed it, the vast majority of FMA fans find the more faithful adaptation (Brotherhood) to be far superior, not because it is more faithful, but because they simply feel that Arakawa's original story is much stronger and more cohesive.
have you guys noticed this too/disagree/have something else to contribute?
With western comic books, fans generally aren't very fussed about adaptations sticking as closely as possible to the "source material", ESPECIALLY when it comes to superhero movies (for reasons i'll explain below).
However when it comes to eastern comic books (or in other words, manga), the fans are very passionate about the source material and are very analytical of changes made in adaptations (sometimes, to an admiteddly pretty embarassing degree).
I would personally attribute this to a few factors.
First of all, when it comes to western comic book movies, the majority of them are about superheroes. The majority of the very big ones (Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, etc) have been around for several decades, and have been passed on to a wide variety of artists and writers who have made several changes over a large period of time. While there is an expected characterization for these characters that define them as those characters, there are alternate ones and several variations to the point where one is not really considered any more "legitimate" than the other. In the case of very old superheroes, the original run of these characters by their creators is not usually considered the best version of that character by fans, because the characters were not "fully fleshed out" yet, and because the writing and art of those times are very bland and static compared to how far comic books have come today. People's image of Batman today is much more tied to the works of artists and writers like Neal Adams, Frank Miller, Bruce Timm, etc than Bob Kane or Bill Finger.
The second thing to point out is that most people who are familiar with western comic book characters haven't actually read the "source material". This is because the western comic book market went through very hard times during the late 80's to 90's; very few people actually read comic books nowadays. The mainstream public's attachment to these characters comes from movies, tv shows, toy lines, etc, which are already adaptations in and of themselves. Actual comic book fans are aware of all these issues and conundrums and generally take a more relaxed approach to source material issues because they know that the character has gone through so many changes already that it's just another version of them. They know that you can take a story loosely based on the source material and that it has a good chance of being good anyway.
The exact opposite is true for manga.
Generally speaking, most manga adaptations are of works that have not been around for very long and that aren't super mega franchises which have had several different installments and been tossed around to various different writers. As such, the original creator's take on it is generally considered to be much "truer" than anything else, because it was essentially already a fully fleshed out story and characters (unlike western comic books which had to go through a long period for that to happen). The only japanese manga series off the top of my head that is comparable to a western franchise in the previously mentioned sense is Lupin III, which HAS gone through a lot of adaptations and variations in characterization and design.
Part of the reason manga fans have animosity towards changes is because the original content produced by anime studios based on an established property tends to be noticeably weaker than the content from the original source, if not just downright bad. Anime studios will often create "filler" content to pad out the adaptation until more work from the manga comes in and can be adapted, and generally speaking fans dread these, not necessarily because they "aren't canon" or differ from the source material, but because the effort put into them is generally not much and anime studios have trouble writing on the level of the original author.
A good illustration of this is the first Fullmetal Alchemist anime. It has much the same spirit as many western adaptations of comic books (they take characters, ideas, and plot threads from a source and try to make a work inspired by them, rather than just a straight out faithful adaptation). While there are people that enjoyed it, the vast majority of FMA fans find the more faithful adaptation (Brotherhood) to be far superior, not because it is more faithful, but because they simply feel that Arakawa's original story is much stronger and more cohesive.
have you guys noticed this too/disagree/have something else to contribute?