A never-ending conversation regarding superhero movies is how comic-accurate they are in terms of both aesthetics and story. Comic books and films are different mediums, and so, not everything that works on the printed page may necessarily translate well to a live-action adaptation. Sometimes, significant changes to a character can be beneficial. A good example of this is the MCU. If one were to compare some heroes in the franchise to their source material, we'd often see they're not exact copies of each other. Yet, when things are handled well, they just work.
Such discrepancies between comics and live-action often bring up a debate on what the ideal version of a character should be. How they should look and act, and how their backstories should play out. Because of this, it's pretty much guaranteed that no matter what superhero is adapted for the screen or how—be it from Marvel or DC—they will, without a doubt, have their detractors. Now, James Gunn has given his take on this.
Inspired by YouTuber's Go Read Some Comics With Jenna's video, "We Need to Talk About Brainiac," the director took to social media to explain the problem of people assuming that the version of a character they favor is the ultimate representation of said character. In getting his point across, the director fully laid out why it's impossible for his vision to please everyone—and he shouldn't focus on that:
"Great video. Yes, the Brainiac stuff is cool (don't read too much into that part of me reposting), but what I love is [YouTuber Go Read Some Comics with Jenna] talking about 'Fandom Flanderization' [and] how many fans believe some aspect of a character is the only 'true' version, usually dependent on when they first came upon the stories (think yellow oval on Batman's chest, all-powerful Superman, Wonder Woman made from clay) [and] how that potentially diminishes our enjoyment of stories outside of what we expect."
And there it is: A perfecf perspective on the dilemma of delivering an adaptation that will please everyone. As James Gunn is fully aware of, his vision will never be able to connect with every single person in the audience—and neither he, nor any other filmmaker, should strive to achieve such an outcome, because doing so would not lead to the best results.
Tuning Out What Doesn't Work
Going back to the MCU, when Iron Man was announced, a common argument about the project was its perceived futility. After all, who'd pay to see it? Marvel, in turn, tuned those conversations out. The studio didn't wait for audiences to say what they wanted, it showed them what they were going to like. If the studio had paid attention to the noise, Iron Man would have never come out, and things would look a whole lot different for the superhero genre.
That is the strategy the DCU should employ, with the understanding that the people aggressively insisting on how the DCU should be handled, or opposing every decision being made just for the sake of hurting the franchise, are a minority in the grand scheme of things. Are they vocal? Yes, but so is any other fandom. The truth is, superhero fandoms are simply not large enough to carry comic book projects to profitability. That comes from the general audience—the people, who, for the most part, still think Superman will appear in Avengers: Doomsday, and that Tobey Maguire and Tom Holland are playing the same Peter Parker. And the best part about that side of the audience? They're largely unaware of any sort of online discourse.
Ultimately, the only deciding factor in the fate of the DCU is the interest of general viewers, not the Instagram comment expressing their dislike about Batman not having a blue-and-grey costume. Keep in mind, that doesn't mean to close off and ignore any little bit of constructive criticism. There's a big difference between people wanting to complain for the sake of it, and people who actually have something to say—whether that's about their hopes for the future of the DCU, or potential concerns they might have about the franchise. It's easy to tell the two groups apart, as those with a legitimate desire to share their thoughts will never do it in a malicious way.
No, the DCU won't win absolutely everyone over, but that's okay, because it's what every single movie franchise experiences. James Gunn is a very smart creative, and there's something I specifically appreciate about him: His talent to recognize the potential for oddly specific additions that enhance scenes in the most random of ways. An example that comes to mind is Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.
At one point, the space a-holes have to infiltrate Orgocorp, where they meet a character played by Nathan Fillion, who makes a joke about nepotism. The joke is so short, but written so well, and delivered so perfectly, that it elevates the whole scene. It's a rare freakin' skill, and examples like that can be found all throughout his body of work. Look, I'm not trying to kiss up here, but James Gunn is a talented man. That's a fact. He's also a powerhouse in the industry. Go look up the amount of people in Hollywood with the kind of power and freedom he has... go ahead, I'll wait. No, seriously do it... did you find more than 20? No, right?
Why do I bring this up? To point out that Gunn is smart, successful and, to top things off, has an entire superhero universe at his disposal, which also happens to be one of the best storytelling playgrounds in entertainment. He shouldn't zero in on three people complaining about Superman's crotch not having the right shade of red. It would be absurd. He can tune that out completely, while still being receptive to constructive criticism, to take the DCU to the heights it can reach if handled correctly.
The next installment in the DCU, Supergirl, directed by Craig Gillespie and starring Milly Alcock, will fly into theaters on June 26, 2026.
What did you think about Gunn's comments regarding adapting DC characters? Drop your thoughts in the comments.