Taking a beloved comic book character and shoving him, her, or it onto the big screen is always a tricky proposition. Movies are a different medium than comics so changes are expected, but where minor tweaks can improve a picture, meaningless or extensive changes will get you burned in effigy by fevered fans. Which brings me to the new ‘Catwoman’ movie.
This week I accidentally saw a bootleg copy of the still-unreleased trailer for ‘Catwoman’ in perfectly understandable, totally non-litigious circumstances. Without giving away too much of the trailer’s plot, I can tell you that the character is indeed called Catwoman, and she does in fact steal things and jump around rooftops. Otherwise she bears such little resemblance to any frisky feline felon I remember that she may have to present ID before I’ll buy a ticket.
Her real name’s different. Her origin is different. There’s no Batman. She wears a totally impractical leather bikini that’s been carefully pre-shredded and contrives to reveal more of star Halle Berry’s skin than Ms. Barry actually possesses. She can’t control herself around raw fish or cream. She appears to be channeling some sort of a mutant ninja Garfield.
Why would Batman have ever felt threatened by this? He wouldn’t need his martial arts skills at all, he could have defeated her with some yarn or just something shiny.
The Catwoman in the comics doesn’t have powers, she’s just an acrobatic burglar in a skin-tight suit that loves yanking Batman’s chain. Even the 60’s Batman TV show got that right (oh, Julie Newmar!). She’s wild, unpredictable, and limber. You never knew if she’d help Batman, try to kill Batman, try to seduce Batman, or some complicated combination of all three. She’s the ideal psycho girlfriend. What’s not to like?
Now she’s some sort of actualized introvert with revenge fantasies, a bullwhip, and eight feet of cleavage. But don’t worry, it’s okay. It’s the director’s job to interpret the work and incorporate it into his own unique artistic vision that may or may not get mistaken for the original in a dark room. That’s why Disney’s Hunchback could have a happy ending, after all. In fact, why stop there?
Why not make Sherlock Holmes an Asian woman who can see through time? Let’s make Huck Finn a robot! Marlon Brando’s people just called, can we make Harry Potter a fat middle-aged guy? No problem! Hey, wouldn’t it be cool if the main character in the ‘DaVinci Code’ was really an American hot dog vendor who’s also a Siamese twin with explosive hiccoughs, played by Rob Schneider and Coolio? Loads of fun! We bought the rights, we can do what we want with it. The fans will understand. The name’s the same, right?
Obviously it’s a bit premature to prejudge a movie three months ahead of its release date, based on a fuzzy bootleg copy of some sketchy trailer footage. I’m just playing the odds, based on the last few dozen comic book movies, and they depress me.
Moviemakers, please. Honor the source material. There are reasons these characters have been fan favorites for longer than you’ve been alive. Why screw with success? I realize that movies just can’t handle the sort of wordy introspection or character examination that the comics media handles so well, but before you make changes just to make the product more bankable let me point out an interesting fact.
Coincidentally enough there’s another bootleg trailer floating around this week. This one’s for ‘Spider-Man 2,’ which will be coming out just a few weeks before ‘Catwoman.’ Like the first ‘Spider-Man,’ the sequel is sticking to the same hackneyed cliches, the same predictable plots, the same trite relationships, and the same boring old themes established in the Spider-Man comics 42 years ago.
The first ‘Spiderman’ movie made a million jillion dollars.
I’m just saying.