Graphic Novel was better

Rating: 7/10 (29 January 2006)

Even though this was a good movie, it just didn't have the bite that Frank Miller's graphic novel had. i guess it just shows that most times, when a novel, comic or graphic novel is represented is a film format, it has to be adjusted for that very medium. for example, the novel TRAINSPOTTING, is very different from the movie, yet both the film and the book managed to capture the essential essence of what trainspotting is about. there's a similar feel, even though they're differently presented. you can't really turn an acclaimed novel into an excellent film by copying it word for word and converting that into film.one has to transform it to fit the medium of film. because what works in written word may not work the same way on film;unless of course its some rubbish that Dan Brown wrote, which reads more like a movie script than a real novel anyway. one example that springs to mind when i think about the Sin City film, is that scene where the wolf is taking a bit out of Kevin. It's almost an exact replica of that scene in the graphic novel, same picture almost. Yet in movie format, it really does not deliver as much of an impact as is does in the graphic novel form. However, i have to say that my bias is a result of my having read the graphic novel before seeing the movie, thus there were certain expectations involved. There was already a certain standard in my mind that the movie had to achieve for it to be worthy of the graphic novel in terms of quality. If i had done the opposite(seen the movie first then read the graphic novel) i might have a different opinion. however i think its important to remember which came first. The movie is merely a copy of the graphic novel, however it is in the graphic novel that the originality and genius lies.