Before any passionate debates arise, let’s clarify: this is not to undermine the value of the comics. Quite the contrary, these beloved graphic tales form the very foundation upon which these films are built. They deserve every accolade for their creativity and impact. However, some movies have successfully distilled these complex arcs into more accessible narratives, captivating a broader audience and perhaps even sparking interest in the original comics.

With this in mind, let’s delve into the DC movie adaptations that have arguably improved upon their comic origins. This exploration is a celebration of both the creators and the filmmakers who bring these stories to life.

Consider the gripping “Batman: No Man’s Land” storyline from 1999, a sprawling narrative that unfolds over nearly a year. Gotham City, reeling from a catastrophic earthquake, is abandoned by authorities who seal off the city, leaving it in chaos. Those who remain, including Batman, must navigate a ruthless fight for dominance as criminals seize control, plunging Gotham into an anarchic wasteland.

What elevates “The Dark Knight Rises” as a compelling adaptation of “No Man’s Land” lies in its portrayal of Batman’s trials. The film subjects the hero to profound adversity, challenging him to mend his broken body and spirit, and return to save Gotham. It’s a testament to Batman’s indomitable resilience and the city’s collective strength, as they rally together to reclaim their home from the brink of destruction.

Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight Rises” doesn’t adapt “No Man’s Land” beat for beat, but the 2012 film borrows elements for its explosive third act. Bane (Tom Hardy) breaks Batman (Christian Bale), then destroys all points of entry into Gotham except a single bridge. The city collapses into desperation and chaos, as Bane and Talia al Ghul (Marion Cotillard) wreak havoc with the ultimate goal of destroying Gotham.

What makes “The Dark Knight Rises” such a powerful (but loose) adaptation of “No Man’s Land” is how it puts Batman through the wringer. The hero goes to hell and back, as he’s forced to heal his broken back and spirit then find his way back to Gotham. It’s a seismic battle against seemingly insurmountable odds, but it showcases the Dark Knight’s resiliency, as well as that of the citizens of Gotham who stand by him to reclaim their city.

Todd Phillips’ “Joker” tells the story of clown and aspiring comedian Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix), who snaps and turns to a life of crime after a series of traumatic events. It’s supposed to be an origin story for Batman’s most famous rogue, even though the controversial ending of “Joker: Folie à Deux” suggests he wasn’t the real Joker after all.

It isn’t too difficult to see the similarities between 2019’s “Joker” and Alan Moore and Brian Bolland’s “Batman: The Killing Joke.” The latter is considered the definitive origin of the Clown Prince of Crime, as he reflects on his life as a failed stand-up comedian and the subsequent tragedies that led to him becoming the Joker. Yet, in both stories, Joker proves to be an unreliable narrator and the great deceiver, making everyone question if any of what he says is fact or fiction.

“Joker” pulls off this revelation in spectacular fashion. For the longest period, the viewer believes what they’re seeing until they’re hit with the sobering realization that the film is a blurry haze of truth and fantasy, as Arthur experiences it. “The Killing Joke” communicates this through the throwaway line, “If I’m going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice.” “Joker” also excludes a problematic scene from “The Killing Joke” where the Ace of Knaves assaults and paralyzes Barbara Gordon — which certainly doesn’t need to be revisited ever again.

If even Christopher Nolan says Zack Snyder’s “Watchmen” is ahead of its time, who’s going to argue? Snyder’s 2009 adaptation of the comic book series by Alan Moore, Dave Gibbons, and John Higgins stirs up a lot of debate among film and comics fans. No one can dispute it’s a gorgeously shot film, lifting frames from the comic book pages and breathing life into them on screen, but is the message as resounding as that of the book? Technically, yes.

Much of “Watchmen” has to do with the fears of the time and society’s obsession with superheroes. The comic is a deconstruction and critique of the genre, examining how superheroes would likely never work in the adult world. Here’s the funny part, though: Most people misconstrued this as Moore and company encouraging comics to be darker and mature when it was rather about how Moore saw superheroes being for kids — not adults. It requires critical, in-depth thinking, but it also feels preachy about what comics should be and who for (sorry, Alan).

Snyder’s film focuses more on how superheroes impact pop culture and how they would change everyone’s perception of the world if they existed. The filmmaker explained how he tried to stick as close to the source material as possible, but there were so many ideas that he couldn’t even tackle. In retrospect, that’s a good thing, because the message feels clearer and more pointed in the movie than the comic book series.

Zack Snyder’s “Man of Steel” is built out of several Superman stories from the past — especially origin tales. However, one of its strongest influences is “Superman: Earth One” by J. Michael Straczynski, Shane Davis, and Ardian Syaf. Debuting in 2010, this three-volume series is a retelling of the origin from a slightly darker angle. It explores how Clark Kent comes to terms with his Kryptonian heritage and the influence of the Kents on his life, as well as the turning point that leads to him becoming Superman. Clark isn’t exactly happy-go-lucky here, as he struggles to reconcile all the different parts of himself.

Only two volumes were released before “Man of Steel” hit theaters in 2013, but it’s clear that Snyder used parts of the story and its themes as inspiration, as well as the costume (sans the red underpants). Regardless whether someone likes a darker Superman or not, one cannot deny that this was in line with what DC did at the time, as the publisher ventured into the mature domain with the New 52 and other releases.

Having said that, Snyder managed to pick apart the good pieces from “Superman: Earth One” and smoosh it together with the script written by David S. Goyer. Ultimately, it still tells the familiar Superman story that everyone knows but through a mature lens. Yeah, we know, snapping Zod’s neck is a choice, but it fits with the mood and tone of the tale.

Let’s be real here: Shazam hasn’t been a major priority at DC for a while now. The character appears on the fringes — most likely because he’s similarly powered to Superman, and everyone knows the Big Blue Boy Scout is the golden boy here. When the New 52 launched, it featured Shazam back-up stories — created by Geoff Johns and Gary Frank — in “Justice League.” Sure, they might have been secondary to the main storyline, but they proved to be a fantastic retelling of how Billy Batson gained his powers, as well as a good introduction to the rest of the Shazam Family.

David F. Sandberg’s “Shazam!” uses the New 52 run as its primary influence, but it puts a bigger spotlight on the family aspect even more. It demonstrates how Billy (Asher Angel) develops all this incredible power that allows him to become Shazam (Zachary Levi); however, even as the most powerful hero in the world, it means nothing if it feels like you don’t belong somewhere. Superhero business aside, the film is all about finding family.

The “Shazam!” movie blew everyone away because it also countered what DC was doing at the time. As a matter of fact, this 2019 film feels like it would fit in more with DC Studios’ output than the Snyderverse. Whichever way, it took the good baseline from the comics and built up an even better story in the end.