Skip to main content

How is the movie adaptation of R.I.P.D. different from the comic?


How is the movie adaptation of R.I.P.D. different from the comic? There appears to be no wiki for the comic. But seeing as to how the movie is considered to be a flop, I'm curious to know how faithful the script was to the original.




Answer



Quite a bit different, in terms of story elements, things chased, people chasing and locations chased to. But I suspect even if they followed the comic to the letter, there was something missing from this movie, an inner connection with the viewer it fails to make; a film full of snazzy props and witty patter, but alas, signifying nothing.


The comic promotional information sold the comic thusly:



Welcome to the Rest In Peace Department--the devoted, yet dead, officers of divine law enforcement "patrolling the deadbeat. . . reporting to one boss." Yep--THAT boss. Nick Cruz died an untimely death, at the height of his personal and professional life. Why did he join the R.I.P.D.? Well, not knowing the identity of his killer has left his soul a bit. . . restless. Now he hunts some of the most fiendish creatures, hoping for the chance to find out who set him up so he can get into heaven.



enter image description here


The movie producers, however, cannot blame the comic for the changes they made in the screenplay:





  • The initial premise of a frame which results in the death of the young police officer (Nick Cruz, in the comic, Nick Walker in the movie) is the same.




  • The magical MacGuffin (object which powers the plot, bad guys want it, good guys want to prevent them from having it) is different. The comic uses the Sword of the Archangel, Michael, the movie, the staff of Jericho.




  • The comic has a chase scene where the protagonists end up in hell putting down a rebellion, defeating the bad guy and recovering the McGuffin. The movie puts the viewer in hell (as the bad guys invade Heaven, steal the Staff of Jericho and some other artifact which creates some techno-magic device bringing the dead back to Earth.




  • The two works are completely different in their story and tone and does not seem to be a true adaptation of the work but more of a derivation of the characters and setting with a completely different story written for the screenplay.





This sounds as if this was definitely a case of Adaptation Decay (where the subsequent materials is much worse than the source - obligatory TVTropes warning). Critics also found it unbearable to watch:



Film critic Roger Moore gave the film one-and-a-half out of four stars, calling it "the worst comic book adaptation since Jonah Hex." - Moore, Roger (2013-07-19). "Movie Review: R.I.P.D. - "Jonah Hex Redux"". Movie Nation. Retrieved 2013-07-19.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....
Post a Comment
Read more

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...
Post a Comment
Read more