Not Everything Needs to Be ‘Comic Accurate’—Grow Up

Let’s get this straight… when it comes to comic book canon, people need to seriously loosen the hell up.

This obsessive need for every adaptation, reboot, or fresh interpretation to rigidly follow some mythical "sacred" continuity is not only misguided… it completely misses the point of what makes comics great in the first place. This medium thrives on change. It evolves. It reinvents. And if you’re not down with that, you’re probably not paying attention to the actual history of these characters you claim to love.

Every time a new writer picks up the pen, or a director takes a swing at bringing a beloved character to screen, there's this immediate mob of fans shouting, “That’s not comic accurate!” or “That’s not canon!” as if canon is some unbreakable law carved into stone by Jack Kirby himself. Spoiler alert…. it’s not. It never was.

Let’s take Superman. The Superman you know today… The flying, laser eyed, godlike symbol of hope. He did not exist in 1938. He couldn’t fly. He wasn’t “the last son of Krypton.” Hell, he didn’t even have the Fortress of Solitude or the moral compass that defines him now. Those things came later. Built brick by brick by decades of writers, artists, editors, and yes, even filmmakers.

This idea that the version you grew up with is the only valid one? That’s not reverence… that’s creative ignorance.

And guess what? We need new takes. We need different perspectives. We need the Gunns, the Snyders, the Reeves, the Morrisons, and the Tom Kings of the world to step in and remix the formula. Sometimes they capture something timeless. Sometimes they throw in something weird that fades into obscurity. Either way, it keeps the blood flowing.

Remember when people whined that Robert Downey Jr. didn’t play Tony Stark like a raging alcoholic 24/7? Or when folks lost their minds because Hugh Jackman was too tall and too charming to play the 5'3" Canadian rage gremlin we call Logan? Yeah. Funny how all that melted away once the performances hit the screen and became iconic.

The point is. Adaptation is not duplication. And that’s a good thing.

Nobody’s saying that characters should be butchered beyond recognition. The core has to remain intact.

Superman should still represent hope.

Batman should still be driven by loss.

Spider-Man should still be the scrappy underdog who can’t catch a break.

But the details? The gadgets, the suit, the tone, the era, even the powers… those are all fair game for reinterpretation.

That’s not disrespecting canon… that’s honoring the legacy by keeping it alive and breathing.

Because here's the truth fanboys don’t want to hear. Canon is not a box. It's a playground. And every so often, a creator comes along and builds a brand new slide.

Sometimes it breaks. Sometimes it becomes the new standard.

But it always moves forward.

So the next time a movie or show tweaks a costume, changes an origin, or leans into a new tone… don’t freak out. Don’t cry “betrayal!” because it doesn’t match a 1987 issue you read once. Ask the real question,

Does this version stay true to who the character is at their core?

If the answer is yes? Then congratulations. You’re watching canon evolve in real time.

And that’s the whole damn point.