[ SECRET POST #2925 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2925 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 046 secrets from Secret Submission Post #418.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Good Adaptions

[(Anonymous)]

So, I don't know anything about STALKER or its book. But, from your comment, the movie is loosely based on the book. Would you then be sympathetic/understand if a fan of the book was disappointed in the adaption? If they wanted to see their book made into a movie and were given something else?

Like, I guess the heart of what I'm getting at is when a very loose adaption is made, doesn't it seem reasonable for book fans to be disappointed? (Might not be the case in your particular example.)

Re: Good Adaptions

[herpymcderp]

I understand when people are disappointed in an adaptation that shits all over the source material. Whether it's faithful to events and characters or not, I feel like often the most important thing for an adaptation to get right is the feeling that the original work gives you.

For that reason I think GoT is a good adaptation, even though it skips over a lot of material and adds its own stuff. I think STALKER is even better because it captures the emotional content of the novel so flawlessly.