UnpleasantlySexy

WARNING! I am about to cross into a socially awkward nerd dimension, and if you don't feel like pondering the finer points of comics-put-to-film, you should just stop now. My brain went into analytical mode without my permission, and this is where I vomited it all out.

Again, if you're worried about catching that rare strain of nerd cooties, avert your eyes and wait for the next post!

I won't be upset with you.

Here we go.

We just went to see the movie 300 in the theater, and, as a huge (and original, if you can tolerate my snobbery) fan of the comic, I must say that I give this film a chest-pounding, full-throated "Ehhh..."

The thing is, the comic captures this incredible, visceral feel in each frame, and it is highly kinetic in its narrative structure. The images are very stark and simplistic, which works well in conveying the bleakness of the story being told. For those of you who haven't read/seen it, it is an exaggerated and stylized depiction of 300 Spartan soldiers who fought off an impossibly huge and overwhelming Persian army (at least, long enough for reinforcements to eventually arrive).

The story definitely favors the Spartans, and they appear in the tale as very nearly superhuman in regards to their fighting prowess, unity and bravery. They are fighting the many armies of the Persian god-king, Xerxes (a man who has convinced everyone, including himself, that he is a god walking among men). It's great in the comic because the Spartans are strengthened by their very human-ness, while Xerxes is, although seemingly all-powerful, fundamentally flawed and weakened by his desire to be more than that which he is capable - and therefore he becomes a fearsome and wicked alien foe for these idealized, perfect humans. The story becomes a tale of mankind's triumph over any hardship by exaggerating the very best traits of humanity.

The movie, however, wanders away from this (I think) very necessary juxtaposition. We see much, much more of the Spartans in the film than appears in the comic, and they are portrayed as these stunningly noble and incorruptible valiant men (and proud fathers and passionate husbands) throughout the entirety of the movie, which, oddly enough, nurtures within the audience a feeling of apathy for the characters. Gone are the fantastical, desperate feats of true heroism and valor from the comic. Instead, the Spartans in the movie are already so spectacular in nature that you just expect them to be capable of such amazing things, which (for the audience) steadily evens out those previously overwhelming odds against winning such a fight.

I must say that, despite my issues with it, this movie is marvelously well-made and simply gorgeous to look at. It is plainly obvious in its remarkable similarity to Frank Miller's original art that the creators of this movie intended to remain true to the source material. The director, Zack Snyder is slated to make Alan Moore's and Dave Gibbons' Watchmen next, and this movie suggests to me that he can do it faithfully.

I wasn't expecting to write a thesis paper on this, but as a hardcore comics geek, it got me thinking about what makes comics-to-film adaptations work and what pushes them off-track. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies work really well, and I think it's because the director puts so much consideration into making his story seem truly plausible to the audience that he's willing to alter parts of the original lore just enough to make it believable. That's a scary thing, though, because Ang Lee did it with Hulk, perhaps too much, and nobody liked it (I think I was one of about nine people who did). Punisher is another example of a director making the story too realistic (everyone wanted to see a big white skull on his chest), whereas everybody LOVED Batman Begins because it was more realistic than any Batman film before it. Superman, however, can't have such grittiness and realism - the protagonist is such an apple-pie good guy that no one wants to see him dealing with real bad guys, like killers and rapists - that's Batman's territory.

There seems to be a hair-thin line drawn between good and bad comics adaptations, and I guess it depends on a balance being struck between the director's understanding of the nature of the character(s) and the audience's expectations from, in some cases, as much as 70 years of comics memories whether or not the film reverently approaches that line (Fantastic Four), nails it (Batman Begins), or ignorantly leaps too far past it (Daredevil).

So...300 is good, but the comic is great, and give Hulk another chance - it's better than you think. Told ya I'm a nerd when it comes to this! If you read all of this, though, be careful - you just might be a nerd, too.