Regarding film intervals, one of the reasons these were dropped was the increasing length of films, okay when you had a double feature not so great when you have a film averaging over two hours. The last time I experienced a film with an intermission was in Amsterdam watching strangely enough Shakespeare in Love, it was a rather weird experience and didn’t greatly enhance the film.
I am not sure that I would want to go to a cinema to watch a nigh on three hour film, waste the fifteen minutes before hand watching the adverts and previews and then another twenty minutes for an interval. An eight o’clock film would be kicking people out about midnight.
I understand fans like films based on their books to be as close to the novel as possible, but really it’s never going to be practical. A three hundred page book is going to turn into a three to four hour film at least and many of the subplots are unnecessary to the main story. You get a far greater connection to characters while reading, so you care about Fred’s problems with his girlfriend and the fact that his next door neighbour is a berk. The pacing necessary in films makes this a distraction, especially if the girlfriend and neighbour never appear in main plot.
Most people who go to see these films only have a passing understanding of the books the films are based on, they don’t get caught up on the fan favourite bits that get left out. A film maker has to compare the needs of majority of the filmgoer against the relative small number of fans. Take Watchmen for instance, it kept pretty much to the graphic novel, tweaking the psychic monstrosity climax into something that made more sense. The problem was most people who went to see it didn’t get it, what works in a graphic novel does not always work on film. Personally I loved the film, it contains the two, sorry three, best superhero fights in any film, but I was in the minority even amongst fans of the novel.
Actually I find fan fury more annoying than bits being left out of adaptations. Sure some adaptations are terrible, but the good ones and LotR (before I was forced to watch it till the point I have become bored with it) was a good trilogy of films in their own right. Sometimes fans just need to accept that the film is a different version of the story and appreciate it for what it is, rather than what they hoped it would be.
Thanks for making this new post, i have no idea why the last one was closed.
Yeah i think you are right, although i'd personally like to see both.
However, then that said LOTR would have probably been seven movies long.
I tend to agree with Fan Fury and obsession in this area, i've always tried to keep a everything in moderation including moderation, but i think this sort of thing is natural for us humans, as we all have one obsession or another.
I agree to the Watchman 100% Dave, while i loved the graphic novel, i still thought it was good, its cinematography was fantastic.
Here's a question,
If you could re make 3 movies properly, ones of which you personally thought lacked, or just didn't do what you thought it said on the tin per say (be it book adaptation or just an appauling film which could have been so much better) What would you pick?
I think adaptations of books/graphic novels can be a risky business, but also one that can justify the trouble. As long as they are done right.
And by "right" I don't necessarily mean "the same as the book". The story and everything has to be taken into account and indeed, be accounted for. If something is not possible on screen, or would divert the viewer making them think "WTF!?" then it should be changed or dropped.
I think the different versions of LOTR did this quite well - things were taken out for the short version that only fans complained about (and the idiot reviewers) but were not CRITICAL for the films story or pacing. I like both the normal and the extended versions in their own rights. I only own the normal versions.
Now! To prove my point about a book being changed in its dramatisation to fit the big screen I give you my favourite ever adaptation: Catch 22 (Joseph Heller). [bring on the controversial reactions! hehe] This is a superlative novel that only gets put 50% or so onto the screen in the same way as the book is written. The content is there but it is given to us in a totally different way - in the film it is via flashbacks but in the novel it is linear. And it works brilliantly.
The most recent conversion I have seen is the Time Travellers Wife, and I saw the film then read the book. Books like this one, and Harry Potter can be slightly dissapointing in a way when you watch the film and think "ooh, that wasn't in the book" or "they'e missed a chunk out there!" - if you know (having read the book) that it is not something major I don't think it matters, but if it is something major it can really kill things. Take the female version of Dobby in HP[sauce] - she was a minor part at the end of one film but then played a major part at the start of the next. by not having her in the end of one film the makers have really shot themselves in the foot for the next film...!!!
As to bad conversions that I'd like them to try again: I nominate the Avengers. I don't dislike the version they made, but I certainly don't rate it as much as the TV series. Emma peel was never one for "one-line-quips" she had proper humour, not sarcasm to the degree shown in the film. And the teddy-bear thing with Izzard and Connery was far-fetched even for the Avengers. So yeah, remake that one please!
Sam
Oh, and the previous post was closed by the Moderators due to the distinct possibility of it becoming a bare-knuckle fist-fight, and going way off the stated topic.
Harry potter and the half blood prince pretty much glossed over the half blood prince aspect of the book, so when snape at the end says to Harry " i am the half blood prince " it has little or no impact compared to the book and honestly if i hadnt read the book , i would have been going "what , eh "
I thought all the lord of the ring films were amazing , especially as i found the books to be overlong and by the end had forgotten who half the characters were so i didnt mind the bits left out or indeed different charatcers saying diologe that was said by other characters . after all unless you were a LOTR fan you wouldnt notice any way .
i cant think of one film adaption of a book id change becouse in most cases , ive not read the book in question so ive not been bothered by the adaptation
as to the closure of the other thread i wont comment
Wayne
Ah the bane of online discussions, nervous mods!
I agree with the Avengers film (got worried there for a sec, thought you meant the other Avengers film which is not out yet), but I think that is more to do with fact that original series would not make much sense in the modern cinema. Evidence for the prosecution: the New Avengers!
On bad adaptations the first Hulk film, trying to make the Hulk a sympathetic character and those stupid hulk dogs was a mistake. The Incredible Hulk got it right, the Hulk is there to smash things (Hulk Smash!!) and that’s about it really. Marvel have been pretty good in recent years, other than the last X-men film and possibly Wolverine (haven’t seen it), whether that will change now since the alliance between the House of M and the House of Mouse we shall have to wait and see.
Not really an adaptation but a continuation of a fan fave, Star Wars Episode One what a disappointment. They could have done such a better job than a rehash of the first film and the whole virgin birth thing was a mistake. It was a kid’s film, but Lucas should have remembered that over half the people who would want to see the film grew up with it and nods in their direction should have been made. Lucas should also have remembered that bigger special effects do not cover poor writing and like Empire Strikes Back who should have let more people help with the story line and definitely the script. As for the waking Darth Vader at the end of Episode Three, the less said the better!
Okay to court controversy here (remember kiddies no bare knuckles it makes the rabbit nervous) : The new Star Trek good or bad? Personally I have never been a huge fan of ST, too clean and perfect, the new film is my favourite of all of them and I hope the continue in that vein. I understand some die hards though hate it, since it goes against many things in the original.
LMAO - Dave you saying that about th nervous mods conjured a rather amusing image in my head of them sitting in the war room saying "DEFCON 1 BIFFORD DEFCON 1, THE SOVIET DAVE EMPIRE HAS MADE ITS FINAL MOVE...." .... *American Accent* "GOD DAMN THOSE EVIL REF COMMIES"
I tend to agree with a lot of the points here. Yes the Avenger film was bad, i agree with the hulk.
Dave, you should really see the new wolverine film, its a bit emotional at points but generally it really was a good film, i think you'll really enjoy it.
Dave - the film made me cry buckets, but yes i loved it and both hated it, i'm a huge star trek fan / nerd, so i loved it for being an excellent film but hated it for other reasons. However i am greatly looking forward to the future films. That said, my main hate in it was for the Romulans - I hated the American Accents, the Steroids, and the stupid tattoo's. If they did something else then (or explain it more and why they are that way) in the later films, that would be fantastic. A bit like how star trek in the most recent series of enterprise awesomely sorted out why some Klingons have no ridges and some do (explaining the original change over from original star trek to generations onwards).
Wayne- I couldn't really say about the harry potter films, i've not been particularly fond of the franchise.
On a side note, Dave, Wayne, fancy going outside for a bare 'foot' knuckle fist fight?
As to what was said about LOTR - Yes the film did well financially etc and obviously well in acclaim, however, I still would have loved to have seen some of the vital parts stay, like the 'true' time things took, and the true extent of Aragorns age, and so on.
Unfortunately, although Marvel are now playing with Disney (hopefully to the benefit of the movie-going public), 20thC Fox still owns the movie rights to the characters they've already adapted - I've heard rumors of both a Daredevil and X-men reboot from Fox, just to keep them out of the hands of Marvel Studios
As to LotR, I liked the adaptation into a "mere" 8-hour film. As a 9-series tv serial, it might be have been able to do the missed parts some credit, but it would have been a mess if they'd kept them in for the films.
Max, are you inviting Dave and Wayne over to play footsie?
The Romulans in star trek were miners on a mining vessel , hence the rather dirty unkemp tattoed look to them that most romulans dont have .
While i tend to agree with you wayne, Making them look steroid induced, tattoo's on the face, leather jackets, and a rather pissed off american accent, including a ship which looked utterly un-romulan in any way shape or form, i can honestly say it was taken a bit too far.
Sam - What a marvelous idea, i'd happily invite anyone over to play footsie.
Quick comments (might be followed up, but probably not).
Hulk is not a protagonist! Banner is not sufficiently interesting on his own! No more Hulk films! (Ok, maybe an Avengers film with Hulk as the bad guy)
Romulans are best in season 8 of DS9. Grey, cunning, cold, monumentally self interested, but capable of co-operation where it is in their interest. Basically they got turned into "Eevul" vulcans. Strictly speaking, from the background (in touch with their emotions) the Romulans would actually make better Klingons than the Klingons do. In that way the ones in the reboot (sideboot?) film are true to the background while straying from the cannon.
LOTR Trilogy was fine. Even doing the books as an ongoing TV series would be incomprehensible. As has already been commented, sometimes things translate from one medium to another well and sometimes note.
Watchmen and the lack of Eldritch Monster. I hated the EM bit in the book. I basically pretend that bit didn't happen. The film version is actually a massive improvement for me. I did get irritated by the way that Rorsach's revelation moment (killing the guy who has killed the little girl) was arbitrarily changed.
Its funny that big changes can be totally acceptable, but small unnessessary ones can niggle.
Three films that need remaking:
Daredevil (or just erase it from time)
Catwoman (please for heavens sake remove the magic girl-power stuff)
Every Xmen film (cheating I know) because the plots are universally appalling! As with the previous two they has a vast catalogue of plots to choose from and instead come up with utter tripe.
Three things that need to be made into TV or Film.
Fables (if you have not read this series do so, is brilliant)
Hitman (as above, would make brilliant shooty blockbuster)
The Boys (Disco will agree instantly)
So sayeth Troy
On Troy’s three films that need changing:
Daredevil: Agree though we should add Elektra to that as well.
Catwoman: Agree, bares little/no relation to the comic book character, who makes little sense divorced from her DC roots.
Xmen: Sort of agree, I think the problem is that they tried to mix together too many elements of the cannon together, without sticking to any of the elements closely enough. Including the Phoenix Saga was a mistake especially since they bodged it so badly, I am guessing non-fans didn’t get the relevance and us fans knew the way it was done was cods.
Hitman has been done as a film (2007), it wasn’t well received. I watched it and thought it was okayish, but I have never played the games. As for the other two have heard good things about them, but never read them. Would add the Invisibles to the list, but I think that maybe a bit too weird and extreme for mainstream audiences!
Hitman the game has, yes, but there was also a DC Comics series entirely unrelated to Agent 41 and co, which was much more amusing.
Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitman_(comics)
I'm... not so sure I can endorse your call for The Boys to be movie-ised. It would have to be re-written by a much better writer than Garth Ennis, frankly. Although the
idea would certainly work brilliantly.
Different hitman Dave. I'm refering to the DC character.
There are vanishingly few games that would do well as films.
Something set in Rapture, the city from bioshock might be interesting. Or a film version of psychonauts!
I poo poo your oppinion of ennis's writing sam! I think he does a pretty good job.
The Filth should be made into a tv series that is compulsory viewing!
Top Ten would be a crazy brilliant tv series, but with a sfx budget to put NASA to shame. A cross between the tick and csi....
Who ever said it was myself who closed the thread????
Hmmmm???????
(11-02-2010 07:16 PM)Bifford Wrote: [ -> ]Who ever said it was myself who closed the thread????
Hmmmm???????
no one did . you told us it was one of the mods . but no one has said anyone by name But if it wasnt you that leaves Alex, Emma or Cat . If your going to close threads at least have the decency to be public about it
(11-02-2010 01:08 PM)MaximasVonBracey Wrote: [ -> ]While i tend to agree with you wayne, Making them look steroid induced, tattoo's on the face, leather jackets, and a rather pissed off american accent, including a ship which looked utterly un-romulan in any way shape or form, i can honestly say it was taken a bit too far.
Sam - What a marvelous idea, i'd happily invite anyone over to play footsie.
well let me ask this . Why would a mining vessel be built in the same way as a military vessel ?
As for accents , nearly Every species in star trek has american accents , due ot most star trek being filmed in America and the avialablity of american actors . The same reason most Aliens in Dr who sound british
And perhaps the leather , been hard wearing and more protective than cloth was worn becouse of the type of vessel they were on which wasnt a military vessel
And lastly the tattoos and muscles. These are the romulan equivelent of red neck working class people . Not Military or political people which is what most other Romulans seen have been . to me Tattoos and muscles seem completly in keeping with the type of people the ships crew are supposed to be .
That been said everyones entitled to their own opinions
(11-02-2010 07:30 PM)lorddarkspring Wrote: [ -> ] (11-02-2010 07:16 PM)Bifford Wrote: [ -> ]Who ever said it was myself who closed the thread????
Hmmmm???????
no one did . you told us it was one of the mods . but no one has said anyone by name , even if they are idiots .
One of you distinctly pointed the finger at me by talking about "the rabbit" and another of you used my handle in a joke. therefore several of the people on this particular thread insinuated it was myself who closed the thread. Therefore I would like, and deserve, an apology. As do the moderators in general.
As to who closed the thread, that does not matter - like in LARP, the Moderator's decision is sacrosanct. Don't mess with it, or if you want to send a private message to the moderators and they will deal with it privately. Not in open discussion.
Sam
(11-02-2010 07:56 PM)Bifford Wrote: [ -> ] (11-02-2010 07:30 PM)lorddarkspring Wrote: [ -> ] (11-02-2010 07:16 PM)Bifford Wrote: [ -> ]Who ever said it was myself who closed the thread????
Hmmmm???????
no one did . you told us it was one of the mods . but no one has said anyone by name , even if they are idiots .
One of you distinctly pointed the finger at me by talking about "the rabbit" and another of you used my handle in a joke. therefore several of the people on this particular thread insinuated it was myself who closed the thread. Therefore I would like, and deserve, an apology. As do the moderators in general.
As to who closed the thread, that does not matter - like in LARP, the Moderator's decision is sacrosanct. Don't mess with it, or if you want to send a private message to the moderators and they will deal with it privately. Not in open discussion.
Sam
ok i wont in open discussion say what i really think on a perfectly reasonable thread that had nearly degenrated into an argument , but becouse of the common sense of the people involved was put back into a proper desicusion , been closed by a numpty who felt something was wrong with that thread yet didnt even have the bottle to issue a warning before deciding to close it and i wont say what i think about the comments left by the admin in regard to my questioning of that decision despite the level of utter idiocy in that comment
Instead i will send my complaint directly to the admins and hope for a better response in the future regarding the censorship of this board
Apologies for the amount of sarcasm in the last comment . I promise it wont happen again . after all we dont want the thread locked lol