World War z news turns into geek rant

So I just read this article at dorkshelf.com about the possible scrapping of the movie based on Max Brooks' amazing novel World War Z (which is, infact, on of my all time favorites). And well, the article left me thinking.

They bring up the point that it was going to be edited to receive a PG-13 rating, and as such, Max Brooks fanboys (myself included) should be pleased that it isn't getting made.

On this in particular, I definitely agree. I would rather have it not done at all than done wrong. This book is so insightful and in depth, to censor it would be to remove its integrity. At least in my humble opinion.

But this brought up my thoughts on this type of situation in general. We, as nerds, dorks, fanboys and fangirls seem to have a universal feeling that these things that we love belong to us in a sense. That book, comic, video game or what have you, that is ours. No one should be allowed to touch it without our approval. Is it unreasonable to feel that we have certain rights to the material we love oh so much?

My personal opinion on the subject stems from a quote that I retweeted recently. "Geeks dont just have interests, they have passions." And it couldn't be truer. It's not just something we like or take an interest in, these things we love are part of our lifestyle. And we have to sit back and watch time and time again as the things we have put so much time into and loved for years are taken and destroyed. Our favorite books, comic characters, everything get taken and altered for a more "wide-spread" audience, so to speak. And suddenly, everyone thinks they have the same passion and knowledge that we've put years into.

Let me quantify this using say, Xmen or Spiderman. Comics I have loved for years get taken and turned into terrible movies. Should I happen to bring up these characters in a generic conversation, someone will say "Oh yeah, Mary Jane was the one played by Kristen Dunst, right?" Well no, that's not what I'm speaking about her as. That's not the MJ I know. If I bring up Gambit, people don't seem to understand that there were characters who are not in the movies. And I find most people's lack of understanding incredibly frustrating.

We do get lucky from time to time, with movies like Lord of the Rings, Scott Pilgrim vs the World, or even Iron Man. Or shows such as The Walking Dead. And in all these instances, these shows or movies have been a commercial and critical success, and met almost universal geek approval. So staying true to your original inspiration and the established fan base equals success. There's a reasons it has that fan base. Because it's good already, it doesn't need to be drastically changed. And I do feel that the established fan base is owed a loyal interpretation. Honestly, we have the right to a quality video game movie adaptation for once.

On the other hand, we do make it difficult. Let's be honest, geeks can be the biggest, most pessimistic jerks you know. Nothing is ever good enough. If it's a great movie, we will still say the book was better. Even if it seems flawless, we will pick apart and find every little problem. We tend not to be the type to just sit back and be greatful for something. We discuss, argue, rewatch, rant about and dissect everything. In my personal defense, I do this because I love the original subject matter so much, I don't feel like it ever needs to be altered. Take the Uncharted movie for example. If the movie were a carbon copy of Among theives, I still wouldn't like it as much. Because the game was perfect. The game was so rich and cinematic that I don't think it ever needs to be a movie. Yes, I may be putting it up on a pedastal but the fact is I'm always going to be happier with the original. No movie could ever impress me as much as that game did.

So to sum it all up, I have to say... As a geek, no, I will never be satisfied with anything. But I challenge hollywood to try.