Are comic origins REALLY that hard to replicate?

Honestly, how many times do we have to see yet another comic book that changes the origins or tweaks it a little TOO much. I present the evidence:

- Joker killed Batmans parents (WTF?)

- Spiderman was bitten by a GENETICALLY ENGINEERED Spider and gained web spinning powers (and little hairs on his fingers?) rather than the knowledge on how to MAKE web fluid (WTF?). This is confusing to Joe Public because most people know he was bitten by a RADIOACTIVE spider - it's so famous , why was it changed?

- The Hulk was inside Banner since birth and a stupid gamma ray experiment released it (WTF?). We wanted that gamma bomb!

- Daredevil trained with his dad and then later by himself - okaaaay. No mention of Stick!

What is it with changing the origins of the superheroes? Thats one of the coolest bits of the comics, the origin story. It's also one of the most famous bits of the comics - so why do ego-centric film-makers feel the need to constantly bombard us with "re-imaginings"??? They confuse the general public (hang on - didn't he get caught in a gamma bomb, or experiment on himself? oh come on the spider is supposed to be radioactive isnt it, not a blue and red super-spider?).

It's getting quite tedious don't you all think?

I can deal with comprimises, they have to be made for a movie, but some compromises in comic adaptations are uncalled for and confusing, especially with characters as "sacred" as Spiderman (and not only that - but a radioactive spider would have taken less screen time than that explanation about the genetically engineered ones)

Well the Spider-Man change was made to modernize a story. It makes more sense that labs would be testing genetic engineering instead of using open radiation.

I really don't mind the changes. Sometimes they make the origins better, I have to admit.

I think movies should be as true to their origins as is practicle. Thus it does bother me when they change heroes' origins. And the idea of a genetically engeneered spider giving someone powers makes even less sense than the idea of a radiactive spider doing the same thing.

Apparently Parker is the only person bit by this spider lol

Yeah THATS what I meant.

Comic spider: Radiation means that it's near dead. It bites Peter because he is the only one close enough, and then it passes on its powers to him and it dies. Only ONE Spiderman.

Movie spider: Genetically engineered spider (of which it was one of like FIFTEEN!) bites Peter, for no good reason at all, and we never see it again. This means by the movie logic, that these spiders just randomly bite people (as opposed to biting people when they are about to die), and don't die, meaning that there should be more than one Spiderman, or at least the POTENTIAL for more than one spiderman.

Plus, think about it, the Spiderman jingle is no longer true: "Is he strong? Listen bud, he's got radioactive blood!" - well, no he hasn't.

It tried to modernise it too much, so did the Hulk, when there was no good reason at all, and just by following the comic book origins properly and thinking logically about it would have meant less people would be scratching their heads as to why a stupid genetically engineered had to bite Peter and not a radioactive one.

Since when is that making the origins better? Or more believeable? In Spiderman you have a web spinning wall crawling superhero and a crazy Goblin flying around on a self-propelled glider! I think they could have gotten away with using radiation as an explanation 🙄

I agree but i do think using those 3 species of spider were meant to tell us just how good it would be to do what a spider can. The common house spider can't jump far or have spidersense or have superstrong webbing. This was definiteley done for the new audience

Originally posted by kal-el
I agree but i do think using those 3 species of spider were meant to tell us just how good it would be to do what a spider can. The common house spider can't jump far or have spidersense or have superstrong webbing. This was definiteley done for the new audience

That may be, but the reason why Spiderman got all those powers was because of the WAY in which common Spider powers translated itself through Peters human body.

The reason why Spiderman could jump so high was because he gained the ability to lift like ten tonnes. He had the propertional strength of a spider remember? That same power was translated into his legs. Humans have the ability to jump very easily, spiders do not. This meant a human could use that new strength in their legs as a means to jump extremely high. Makes TOTAL sense.

Even then, they could have had the spider become radioactive through it being tested on - and that would explain why there was only one Spiderman.

The comic book origins are easy to understand, it's very simple, you just need to think a little harder than 'not-at-all' and it'll be understood. Now that I look back on it, the movie was a bit patronising.

It doesn't make that much sense coz spiders don't have very good proprtionate strength(Stan Lee just assumed they did because ants do).The jumping spider howver can propell itself 40 times its own length.A human with such strength would be very strong. So it can work either way but my main point was that they used that scene to explain what Peter would later be able to do. But I agree that a radioactive spider would have been better personally but it would leave potential new fans in the dark about his powers. And that was the best thing this movie did for marvel. Create new fans. And in doing so it didn't alienate us aleady fans. the hulk IMO alienated everybody as it was just too different. The good thing about all the movies is that we've all got to see our heroes do the things they do well.Spidey looked excellent webswinging(and will look even better in the new one), Hulk looked great leaping all over the place and smashing things up, DD looked great cleaning out Josie's bar(even if the lighting in thtat scene was ridiculous) and showing off his acrobatic/martial arts skills IMO. But each of the origins for the prementioned films could have been better, and that is what you have made your main argument and I agree with you totally.

Red Superfly's entire arguement makes total sense and echoes exactly what I have been pondering over ever since seeing Spiderman and feeling completely let down afterwards And it looks like Marvels consistently managing to turn superheroes from a winning formula and completely change them from what we know and love, while at the same time distorting their characters and backgrounds and making these little changes that DO NOT need to be made.

What next? Captain America being made by falling into a tub of genetically-enhanced Americans?

Reed Richards falling into a tub of genetically-enhanced elastic bands?
Johnny Storm being bitten by a radioactive man who's on fire?

the joker being bitten by a radioactive twatt?!

Originally posted by kal-el
the joker being bitten by a radioactive twatt?!

😆