I know that people who make live action capeshit don't actually

>>94671349
Comic book counter parts vary from artist to artist though

You don't hire actors by source material.

Because comic book characters don't actually look like real people.

>>94671349
Because you gotta put in a big name actor who's name will draw normies to the theater. It's a business. Between making a better movie or a more successful movie, they will pick the latter 100% of the time.

>>94672157
How is Gal Gadot a big name actor?

>>94672157
/thread

>>94672154
What does that have to do with anything? Are you implying there are no ripped good looking guys in Hollywood or that they want the superheroes to look more like the average Joe?

>>94672172
She was in a few action movies. Besides who else were they going to get? The only woman who's currently active and known for action is SJ and she's already Black Widow. Also Gal is a member of the chosen tribe, and that goes a long way in Hollywood.

The new generation of actors suck balls, once the old stars die out, we're fucked. It's already a problem that forces them to produce a lot of movies with old fucks who are barely up for the role physically. Because there are no young guys with charisma to pull it off.

>>94671349
A good adaptation isnt always 1:1

>>94671349
Because they are comic book characters, It is hard to get people who look like them, and even if you find them, it is possible they don't know how to act.

>>94671349
Yes, the art is often exaggerated.

Some fanboys are also legit impossible to please and will only consider something a 'true' depiction if it fits entirely within their headcanon.

every depiction is true

>>94671349
I hope your picture isn't supposed to be an example of an actress who looks like Wonder Woman, because she's definitely not a nasty, man-faced bodybuilder.

File: batman.gif (4MB, 540x550px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 540x550px

>>94671349
hi there

Because the original material is looked down upon and casuals think underwear over pants is retarded.

File: spandex.png (973KB, 1351x422px) Image search: [Google]

973KB, 1351x422px

>>94671349
Because art on a page looks very different from reality.

In comics, superheroes wear spandex bodysuits because comics are drawn with strong black inks, and it looks cool. However in reality spandex is kinda ugly, and makes costumes look like discount Halloween costumes.
Spandex looks good on page, but ugly on the screen - so they have to redesign the costume.

And here's the thing - at this point, where they must redesign the costume - why not go all the way? Comics have very different design sensibilities from mainstream movies.
If they're already redesigning them, they have NOTHING to gain by sticking to the original design, unless costume is iconic enough to nest in conciousness of movie-watching public, like Superman.
But for all the bitching on /co/, people who make comics simply have no reason to make superheroes look "comic accurate". They want to create superheroes that look the best in their respective medium, movies - rather than pointlessly copying the look that looks best in comicbooks.

I mean, consider - Batman in Batman: Arkham games doesn't really look that comic accurate, but noone has a problem with that. Only extra skins try to be 'comic accurate' but they're optional bonuses, while main skins are designed to give optimal experience to everyone - that includes the City/Asylum batsuit, and the armored batsuits from Origins and Knight - shiny armor will simply look cooler in a videogame, and it makes sense because Arkham Batman is much more aggressive and violent - only naturally since they're action games, so no wonder they're all about combat.