This is a criticism that I've seen a lot when it comes to comic book adaptations. And the first thing that people latch onto is the look of actors and actresses, more specifically their race, ethnicity and gender and how it differs from the characters that they are playing. To be fair I also like to see characters on the big screen as they appear on the page and I fully understand why it is problematic to cast a caucasian actor to play a minority character due to real life societal issues that still persist today, I think I didn't need to state that but still. However I don't understand why it is such a big deal among some people that characters should look a certain way when adaptations change certain aspects far more crucial to the source material all the time. In the comics Spider-Man's web shooters and web fluid are important scientific accomplishments of Peter Parker, Raimi movies threw that away. MCU turned Tony Stark into a snarky quip machine who always has something funny to say. Ragnarok turned Thor into a funny doofus which is the complete opposite of his comic counterpart. Avengers literally erased Hank and Janet from the teams roster. I'm not necessarily saying I agree or disagree with these changes, just that physical appearance seems to take precedence over them. Even with physical appearance certain things get overlooked. Wolverine was meant to be a short, sorta ugly man, not 1.90 m tall handsome Hugh Jackman. Yet many people are fine with these changes as long as characters look certain way from what I've seen on the internet. Why is it so? Why some people question Anya Taylor Joy hypothetically playing Silver Silver and not if the movies gonna explain Zenn-La which is literally the characters origin and why he became Surfer in the first place? Why some people say Pedro Pascal doesn't look like Reed Richards as if that's the most important aspect of Reed?
On a related note, how much deviation from the source material is too much for the posters here? Like what's the limit of that?