The Road, opening this week, might well be the big Academy Award winner of 2009. It’s based on a novel by Cormac McCarthy, who also wrote No Country for Old Men, which became the major winner in 2007. The novel was recently named “book of the decade” by the Times magazine. Starring acclaimed Oscar-nominee Viggo Mortensen and 2004 Oscar winner Charlize Theron, The Road deals with compelling themes of survival, human nature and parenthood in a dystopian futuristic world.

We’ll have to wait a few more months to know whether this film will be an award winner. But either way, it’s already gaining attention, mainly because it’s based on such an acclaimed novel.

And that made me wonder: Does a good or popular book increase the chances that the movie will also be acclaimed or successful? To try to answer the question, here are 10 novels from the past decade and the movies that adapted them.

10. The Kite Runner

The highly acclaimed novel by Khaled Hosseini was the #1 bestseller in the United States in 2005 according to Nielsen BookScan. It also received the Boeke prize (2004).

The film was expected to gain the same success. Financially, it turned a nice profit. But critics and viewers gave it a lukewarm reception, and it won no important awards.

9. Atonement

Atonement won several prestigious fiction prizes, and was shortlisted in many others, including the 2001 Booker prize. Time magazine named it the best fiction novel of the year and included it in the all-time list of 100 greatest novels. So it’s obvious why expectations for the movie were high.

While the movie did not gain instant classic status like the novel, critics and viewers considered it very good, and like the novel, it won numerous awards, including at the Oscars and Golden Globes. And it’s the third most profitable film in this list, which is quite an achievement considering it’s a slow-paced period drama.

8. Slumdog Millionaire / Q & A

The rise-to-the-top story echoes the trajectory of the novel itself. Vikas Swarup was a low-profile diplomat when he published Q & A, his first novel. At first the novel gained modest recognition – although it won several awards it did not become a huge bestseller.

Then came the sleeper cinematic adaptation by Danny Boyle, the big winner of the 2008 Oscars with astonishing profits worldwide. The novel reentered bestseller lists and was translated into 40 languages.

I think it’s safe to say that in this case the movie outdid the novel.

7. The Da Vinci Code

Is there any point in talking about critical reaction or awards around this novel? Any reaction, good or bad, is dwarfed by the massive popularity of this novel. Spending over years at the top of bestsellers lists, with more than 80 million copies sold, translated into 44 languages and the focal point of countless parodies and imitations – The Da Vinci Code is a phenomenon and one of the most successful novels of all time.

What could possibly go wrong with the movie adaptation? Just about everything. The well-known stars and the blockbuster status didn’t save it from getting slashed by critics, gaining an embarrassing 24% fresh reviews at Rotten Tomatoes. The price was paid by the sequel Angels and Demons, which grossed far less despite the fact that the film was significantly better.

6. Hannibal Rising

The prequel to the Hannibal Lecter adventures was written reluctantly by author Thomas Harris, mainly because the producer who owned the franchise rights threatened that if he didn’t, someone else would be asked to do it.

So this unwanted novel was born, gained a mixed critical response… but still had enough of the cannibal’s endless charm to make it a bestseller.

Yet what is done unwillingly cannot be as good as what is done willingly, and the movie suffered from that too. It got terrible reviews and while somewhat profitable, was far from a blockbuster.

5. The Nanny Diaries

The Nanny Diaries’ rise on bestsellers charts was a surprise. The writers were students in NYU when they wrote the book. But the book captured new audiences of young, urban women, and the decision to produce a film - and try repeat the success of Bridget Jones Diary - was unavoidable.

But Scarlet Johansson’s star power combined with that of Laura Linney, Paul Giamatti and Alicia Keys was not enough. The film failed to capture the novel’s fresh, satirical tone, and didn’t match up to the book.

4. The Time Traveler’s Wife

The Time Traveler’s wife became a sensation when an extensive marketing campaign pushed the book into 9th place on the New York Times bestseller list in its first week: Very rare for an unknown author (Audrey Niffenegger)’s debut novel, and one with fantastic elements at that. The book was named Amazon.com’s book of the year in 2003.

The romantic premise called out for a movie adaptation. But something got lost on the way - the character depth and psychological complexity. Viewers were left with a kitschy love story, and voted with their feet.

3. Dreamcatcher

Stephen King is all over blockbuster lists: The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, The Shining, Misery… I guess there’s something very cinematic about his stories. But not all of them were successful.

Like most of King’s novels, Dreamcatcher also became an immediate bestseller. Producers were quick to buy the rights, and not even two years passed before the film was released. Unfortunately, this proved too hasty. It was one of the least successful King adaptations, both artistically and financially. The movie broke even worldwide, but that is the same as saying it flopped, barely avoiding disaster.

2. My Sister’s Keeper

My Sister’s Keeper is another example of a novel whose film adaptation emphasized its worst features and almost eliminated the good ones. So the book will be remembered on its own, despite the high profile adaptation.

The novel features an interesting moral dilemma that created public debate. It won several awards and became a readers’ favorite. But as a movie, the story became too sentimental and kitschy, the moral dilemma was flattened and even the big names like Cameron Diaz, Alec Baldwin and Abigail Breslin couldn’t save it. And to top it all off, the ending was altered, causing a massive protest among book fans.

1. Marley & Me

Unlike any of the previous titles, Marley & Me is an autobiographical book, based on a newspaper column by journalist John Grogan. Grogan stated that more people commented on the column he wrote after Marley’s death than on any other column.

It seemed almost impossible to fail with this movie. A cute puppy always steals the show, and so does Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston’s star power.

Financially the film did well, with over $400 million worldwide gross. The critical reception was not as great, but to be honest – the book was not the new Catcher in the Rye, and so the movie does not aim to be the new Citizen Kane.

In my sample, the novels were generally superior to their cinematic adaptations. In other words, a successful novel does not guarantee box office success, let alone critical acclaim - though many adaptations do have their day at the box office.

Popularity: 5% [?]

As we’ve noted once or twice before, movies based on original scripts are becoming a rare breed. It’s a good guess that any movie released today is based on something: a novel, a TV series, a true story…

But what happens when a movie is the result of several incarnations? From book to TV series to musical play to movie… In this post, we’ll try to find order in the remake madness by comparing the different versions in order to decide which is best.

10.

Fame (1980) → Fame (1982) → Fame (2009)

The most recent of these movie incarnations is the current reinvention of the 1980 hit Fame.

It all began with the musical film about a bunch of teenagers at a prestigious high school of performing arts. It was surprisingly successful, earning six Academy Award nominations, two wins, and the love of critics and viewers alike.

Following hot on its heels was the TV series Fame (1982-1987). Very popular in its first seasons, it won several Emmy and Golden Globe awards. Most of the characters from the 1980 film reappeared, so there was a sense of continuity for fans.

The new 2009 version is not exactly a remake of the original movie or the TV series. The setting at a high school for performing arts remains, but the characters are entirely new. The trailer feels more like High School Musical. Think questionable mix of naïve 80s storytelling with contemporary hip music score. Hmm…

Will this movie become a cult hit like its predecessor or be remembered as a tacky remake of a teen classic? So far, as the results from the box office and critics pour in, the latter looks more likely. Over on Pop Vox, Jennie Yabroff compares it to watching American Idol on the big screen - only worse.

9.

Hairspray (1988) → Hairspray (2002 musical play) → Hairspray (2007)

The first version of Hairspray is one of John Waters‘ most well-known films. The story is more or less the same as in the newer version, only it’s not a musical. The movie was not a great success when first released, but quickly became a cult classic on VHS.

Ten years later, an idea was raised to turn the plot of the film into a stage musical. After some turmoil, the musical opened in 2002 and was an immediate success both financially and critically: Raking in Tony Awards, running for over six years and spanning several international productions.

The success of the musical did not go unnoticed by Hollywood studios, who decided to create a new film combining both the 1988 movie (keeping the campy feel and with John Travolta playing a mother!) and the stage version (a musical). The formula seemed to work: along with 4 new songs written especially for the film, Hairspray was released with great success, though it’s early to define it as a cult classic.

So which version is best? In the box office arena there is a definite winner: The 2007 version grossed over $200 million. But on the critical side, the 1988 version gets the upper hand by a little: 97% of good reviews vs. 91% for the 2007 version on RottenTomatoes.

8.

Pride and Prejudice (1813 novel) → Pride and Prejudice (1995) → Bride and Prejudice (2004)

A definite case of artistic freedom stands before us.

Pride and Prejudice is one of Jane Austen’s best novels and a timeless classic. Over the years, it’s been adapted in dozens of movies, TV series, miniseries etc.

The most notable is the BBC adaptation in 1995, which still stands as one of the greatest Austen adaptations (and raised Colin Firth to stardom).

But perhaps the most outrageous and original adaptation of the classic novel is the 2004 Bollywood-style Bride and Prejudice. In this adaptation, Lalita (the Indian parallel to Elizabeth Bennet) meets rich businessman Will Darcy and an immediate love-hate relationship is born. The classic plot is enriched with catchy songs like “No life without wife” and “My lips are waiting.” Conservative Austen fans would probably be appalled, but the Bollywood version is a funny, feel good experience, if you are willing to take a fresh look at a favorite classic.

7.

Sweeney Todd (1973 play) → Sweeney Todd (1979 musical play) → Sweeney Todd (2007)

The first mention of Sweeney Todd was in 1846 in a magazine that featured cheap, sensational fiction. In early versions of the story Todd is portrayed as a gruesome, cold-blooded killer. The first version that gave Todd a more humane side is Christopher Bond’s play from 1973, in which Todd is a wrongfully imprisoned barber who returns to London after 15 years of banishment. Todd as a vengeance-seeker was more relatable than as a killer without a cause.

The famous musical play by Stephen Sondheim is based on the 1973 play, adding an orchestral-operatic score to the story of vengeance and obsession. The original production won many awards, including 8 Tonys, and has been produced around the world many times since.

Director Tim Burton, who saw the original Sondheim musical as a student, dreamed of adapting it to the big screen. In 2006 his dream was fulfilled… Burton’s version is based quite rigidly on the play, with all of the songs except some background music taken directly from it.

Which version is best? It’s hard to compare the different mediums here – each version wins in its own field. Sondheim’s version is highly praised to this day, and Burton’s version is considered the best cinematic adaptation of the story and one of Burton’s finest films overall.

6.

The Producers (1968) → The Producers (2001 musical play) → The Producers (2005)

The Producers (1968), Mel Brooks‘ first attempt as a director, is a surprisingly successful staging of a musical about Hitler. The responses to this wild showbiz farce were naturally very mixed: some thought it outrageous to treat such issues in a comical way, while others felt it was extremely funny and brave. Like many works of art that were ahead of their time, the acceptance and praise of this film grew over the years until it achieved classic status.

In 2001 a musical play adaptation was produced on Broadway. Unusually, in this adaptation Brooks himself was responsible for the song lyrics and some of the music, preserving the sense of humor. The main difference between the two versions is that the 1968 movie was a much darker comedy in comparison to the more upbeat, light stage musical.

The play won no less than twelve Tonys, paving the way for a movie version of the musical. Theoretically, there was no reason why this film shouldn’t succeed. The two leading stars from the Broadway play also star in the film (Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick) along with several smaller roles and even the director of the play. Plus, it had highly successful and acclaimed origins. But theories and reality don’t always match, and The Producers (2005) turned out to be a financial flop with mixed reviews (51% positive reviews at RottenTomatoes vs. 93% for the 1968 version). However, we can’t blame the producers for trying…

5.

The Little Shop of Horrors (1960) → Little Shop of Horrors (1982 musical play) → Little Shop of Horrors (1986)

The original Little Shop of Horrors (1960) was a low-budget horror-comedy B Movie by one of the most productive B Movie directors, Roger Corman. Over the years the film developed a cult following, partly due to a small role by the young Jack Nicholson, which was heavily promoted in the VHS release of the film.

The cult following resulted in the decision to produce a Broadway musical based on the film. This version maintained the basic tone of dark humor, but with several changes: the masochistic dental patient character was eliminated, and at the end everyone gets eaten by the plant.

In 1986, the musical version was adapted back to film. It follows the plot of the play quite closely, except for bringing back the manic dental patient - if only Bill Murray’s acting was always so superb - and the ending. Unlike the grim ending of the stage musical, in the musical movie version (spoiler ahead!) Seymour saves Audrey and they live happily ever after… This change came after extremely negative reviews from test audiences, and gives the entire film gets a lighter, brighter tone.

Today both films are critically well-received and loved by audiences.

4.

Reefer Madness (1936) → Reefer Madness (1998 musical play) → Reefer Madness (2005)

Here’s a case of original material that was taken in an opposite direction in its later incarnations.

The 1936 version was a morality tale produced by a church group. It features high-school students lured to try marijuana, who subsequently descend into manslaughter, rape, suicide and other proportional deeds…

It was rediscovered in the 70s as an unintentional comedy and in 1998 was adapted as a stage musical in Los Angeles, as a humorous parody of the original. The show was later performed Off-Broadway, after going through substantial rewrites.

Despite the fact that the stage musical did not gain much attention and closed quite quickly, the cable network Showtime decided to adapt it as a straight-to-TV movie musical. The result was the extremely funny, campy and irreverent Reefer Madness (2005), which became an ironic favorite for stoners to watch while getting high. The tunes are catchy, the humor is quirky, the costumes are magnificent – it’s a true cult favorite that will make you hum “Listen to Jesus, Jimmy” for days.

3.

Mamma Mia (1975 ABBA song) → Mamma Mia! (1999 musical play) → Mamma Mia! (2008)

A jukebox musical is a risky proposition: The creators really like the songs of an artist or band, so they try to think of a story that can reasonably hold them all together. (As opposed to “regular” musicals where the plot is conceived before or alongside the music - though that’s not a guarantee it won’t be as ridiculous…)

The 1999 stage musical of Mamma Mia! really revived this genre, by performing some of the most beloved songs of the 20th century – by ABBA. And the plot? Well, it’s not that important.

The musical was an enormous success with audiences, and is currently 13th in the list of longest-running Broadway shows, right after classics like The Phantom of the Opera, Cats and Grease.

Such success could not go ignored by Hollywood, and in 2008 a cinematic version was released. The all-star cast, including Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth and Julie Walters, sing and dance to the popular tunes. Unlike the similar Producers’ case, ABBA’s magic touch did the work. Like its stage inspiration, the movie was very profitable, if not critically acclaimed - becoming the highest grossing movie musical of all time worldwide.

The numbers are hard to ignore, and so a sequel is already planned. Will it include the same songs? Will ABBA finally reunite for the occasion?? And do we even want that to happen???

2.

Chicago (1926 play) → Chicago (1975 musical play) → Chicago (2002)

The story of Chicago began when a journalist/playwright covered two real-life murder trials. She emphasized the sensational aspects of the cases, claiming the murdering women were corrupted by men and liquor. Later she turned this report into a play, which even received a silent film version in 1927.

After her death, rights for the play were acquired by Bob Fosse, who choreographed the musical play in 1975. Songs were written to fit the Brechtian atmosphere of glamorized crimes and criminal celebrities.

The musical was not extremely successful, but in 1996 a renewed production gained much attention and covered its initial costs faster than any other musical in history. It eventually ran over five thousand times before closing down.

In 2002 a film was released, influenced by both the 1975 and 1996 musical plays, especially by the vaudeville look of the songs, which in the movie are presented as Roxie Hart’s fantasies. The film was very successful both financially and critically. It won 6 Academy Awards, including Best Picture, and grossed over $300 million worldwide.

1.

8 1\2 (1963) → Nine (1982 musical play) → Nine (2009)

Everyone knows the Fellini classic 8 1\2. It is considered one of the best films in cinematic history.

But how many of us know there is a musical play based upon this film? The stage musical Nine takes the story of the famous film, adds music to it, and creates a whole new take on the story. Strange as it sounds, the musical became quite successful and received five Tonys. Several revivals of the musical have been enacted since.

This November we’ll get the cinematic version of the musical, with Rob Marshall’s Nine. Marshall has already successfully adapted material that has gone through several incarnations. Will he repeat the phenomenal success of Chicago and take over the Academy Awards ceremony? Or will it be a pretentious flop? By the look of the trailer and with an amazing all-star cast that includes Daniel Day-Lewis, Penelope Cruz, Judi Dench, Nicole Kidman, Kate Hudson, Sophia Loren and many others, the result is sure to be glamorous…

Technorati Tags: Fame, Nine, movie, film, remake, television, Broadway,   based on books, based on play

Popularity: 5% [?]

Originality is rare these days. Just look at this week’s new releases: My Sister’s Keeper is based on a novel, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is a sequel based on a children’s TV series, and Cheri is based on a novel and a play. (As We Are Movie Geeks notes, even monsters aren’t safe.)

IMDb’s top 100 titles (in the Top 250 list) echoes this: 42 (!) titles are based on books, 6 on short stories, 3 on plays, 2 on comics, TV series or true stories, and 1 on an article. That leaves only 42 movies with original scripts.

So we wondered: Which “based on” films are the best?  Is it best to go to a movie based on a book or based on a play? Should filmmakers read comics or watch TV for inspiration? Analyzing the “based on” category in our Movie Genome suggests some answers…

Based on a Book: Fantasy, classics and girls in period dresses

Typing “based on a book” in Jinni’s search box brings two main results: classics and bestsellers.

This group is full of adaptations of literary classics – from Lord of the Rings to Pride and Prejudice – alongside adaptations of recent bestsellers like Slumdog Millionaire (Q & A) and No Country for Old Men.

It’s tempting to jump to the conclusion that movies based on books are best. But despite the many book-based movies on IMDb’s top 100, there are also plenty of terrible book-based movies, some of them defiling masterpiece classics.

Also, movies based on books always have the danger of changing the book too much - enraging fans - or following it too closely - alienating people who didn’t read the book. (We’ll have to wait and see where Tim Burton’s Alice falls, beyond the amazing visuals.)

Conclusion: Watching a movie based on a bestselling or classic book is no guarantee of quality. But I think it’s safe to say that it raises the odds, which is not bad at all.

Based on an Article: Politics, society and drama

It’s a rare creature, but movies based on articles do exist. Unlike a book or a play that tells a story, articles are often more abstract and issues-oriented. Article-based movies are usually serious dramas, dealing with issues like human trade, immigration and moral quandaries.

While these movies are mostly absent from top 100 lists, deeper research reveals that they tend to be highly acclaimed and win important prizes. For example, On The Waterfront (1954) won 8 Academy Awards including best picture, and Dog Day Afternoon (1975) is considered a masterpiece by many.

Conclusion: Don’t expect hilarious comedy or light fantasy. But when you try an article-based movie, you have a good chance of striking an acclaimed drama.

Based on Comics: Superheroes, superheroes and… superheroes?

Although movies based on comics are wildly popular, they don’t have much presence in top 100 lists (except for the phenomenon called The Dark Knight).  But don’t cry for them: Financially, they get their fair share.

The successful franchises of Spider-Man, X-Men and Batman all had huge blockbusters lately. Combined with newcomers like Iron Man and Wanted, it seems like most of the money from the movie industry comes from comics adaptations these days.

As for quality – that’s another question. Alongside highly acclaimed comics features like The Dark Knight are some adaptations that shame the original comics and the movie industry. Think Elektra (2005) and Catwoman (2004): both received humiliating 10% fresh ratings on RottenTomatoes. Unreality put Watchmen on the list of most polarizing movies of the decade.

Conclusion: It’s hard to know when it comes to comics-based movies. They can be great or terrible. One caveat: The last decade or so has seen more comics-based movies that don’t deal with superheroes or special powers, but with other, more original, issues. This trend has produced some gems, like Sin City (2005), Ghost World (2001) and American Splendor (2003). That type of comics-based movie is - in my eyes - worth watching.

Based on a Play: Shakespeare meets Broadway

Search for “based on a play” on Jinni and you’ll see two main groups: serious dramatic plays including works by Shakespeare, David Mamet and Tennessee Williams, and light Broadway-style musicals like Grease, Hair and the new versions of The Producers and Hairspray.

There’s this idea that plays are more sophisticated and of higher quality than movies. The catch: Some say that really acclaimed plays, like Shakespeare’s, are so perfect in themselves that adapting them for cinema can only result in disaster. Maybe that’s true - I can think of several bad or mediocre Shakespearean adaptations, but not any masterpieces.

Perhaps that’s the reason the only 3 play-based movies on IMDb’s list are not by the greatest playwrights of all time, but by lesser-known writers. The film directors could create a world of their own, not just stay true to a classic.

Conclusion: Worth a try, especially if the original is not by a master playwright.

Based on a Folktale: Myths, fairytales and animation

Type this in Jinni’s search box, and I believe most of us will encounter some of the best-loved and remembered films of our childhoods - from all-time Disney favorites like Cinderella (1950), The Little Mermaid (1989) and Aladdin (1992) to adaptations of great folk stories like Robin Hood and the Knights of the Round Table.

Conclusion: You might not find the greatest masterpieces of our time, but you’ll get nostalgia and excellent kid-friendly suggestions.

Based on a TV series: The cash cow never gets tired?

So, there’s a TV series. It’s successful. Successful enough that producers feel compelled to try and squeeze a little more out of the lemon, by creating a movie with the same beloved characters and themes. Sometimes it happens during the series run, sometimes afterwards, but the conclusion in most cases is the same – movies based on TV series are bad.

Star Trek could be considered an exception to the rule. Otherwise, looking at this group on Jinni confirms that, other than hardcore fans of the specific TV series, most people believe the movies suck. That was the case with Sex and the City, both of The X-Files movies, Twin Peaks, Miami Vice, and many others. (And now we’ve got M. Night Shyamalan’s first trailer for The Last Airbender…)

Conclusion: If you are not a huge fan of the TV series, try another based-on category. I hope the producers of the A-Team are reading this post, and will not be too proud to cut their losses now and end the 10-year effort to make the movie…

Based on a Video Game: Shut up and shoot

If there’s one category where no one expects to find quality, it’s this. No Shakespearean monologues, original scripts or innovative directing here. What you will find is shooting, fighting and all sorts of other gritty action.

I find it hard to believe any of these movies is critically acclaimed. But like it or not, it seems these movies make enough money to justify sequels and new adaptations. The Resident Evil series, for example, already includes 4 feature films (and the 5th is releasing next year) and several straight-to-video sequels. And the release schedule for the next couple of years includes several game–based movies: Alice, Splinter Cell, Halo and the much-anticipated Prince of Persia.

So perhaps there’s something to this format after all.

Conclusion: Like the title says - if you like shooting more than talking.

Based on a Biography: The good, the bad and the funny

Biography is an interesting study case. Generally the basic material to work with is quite good: be it Jesus or Hitler, William Wallace or Ed Wood, nobody makes a movie about some ordinary, nobody guy.

But good material does not ensure a good movie, or else all biography-based movies would be masterpieces. The truth is, as usual, somewhere in the middle. This category includes highly acclaimed films like The Diving Bell and Butterfly (2007) and The Pianist (2002) alongside mediocre or just plain bad ones like Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus (2006) and De Sade (1969).

Conclusion: Every good movie needs a good story as its base. And since there are so many good stories here, I think that, despite what I wrote above, these movies tend to be at least watchable…

Based on a True Story: Why so serious?

Reality gets short shrift on IMDb’s Top 100 titles. Only 2 are based on true stories, and 5 more are based on books based on true stories. (Confused? Read it again slowly). Maybe truth isn’t stranger than fiction after all.

Almost all the movies in this category deal with serious issues: War, the Holocaust, terrorism… As with biographies, there’s no point depicting history unless something big is happening. And big things tend to be bad things. Nothing to do about it: Movies based on ordinary, daily life, even if it’s true, are just not that interesting.

Conclusion: If you want to sink your teeth into a serious film about the horrors of war or the nature of man under pressure, this one is for you.

Based on a Short Story: Variety is the spice

This category is probably the most elusive of all. In the first results pages for “Based on a short story” on Jinni, no specific styles, genres or topics jump out. There’s a little of almost everything – fantasy (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button), sci-fi (2001: A Space Odyssey), drama (Away From Her) and comedy (Smoke); masterpiece (The Shawshank Redemption) and drivel (Creepshow 2).

When you think about it, this makes sense. The flexible format of the short story allows writers to experiment with a variety of styles and subjects. And the limited material allows filmmakers to stretch the story as they wish.

Conclusion: Like the variety in style, there’s a variety of quality here. It’s hard to say whether these are overall better or worse than other “based on” categories.

So what do you think about the sources of movies these days? Do you prefer a light based-on-a-game flick or a heavier based-on-an-article film? Or do you like your movies fresh and completely original? What are your favorite based-on movies? Comment and let us know!

Technorati Tags: film, movie, tv, television, based on books, based on comics, based on video games

Popularity: 7% [?]