[ SECRET POST #3031 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3031 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.











Notes:

Going to be a late day, so early secrets!

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 035 secrets from Secret Submission Post #433.
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

[(Anonymous)]

I think it's because the movie is a different type of experience to the play. A play is an ephemeral thing, it's a slightly different experience every night, it feels more changeable. You interact with a play in a different way to a movie. Movies feel more ... more static. They're the play frozen in amber, in a way? They hold still, to be examined differently. A bad film feels more permanent than a bad run of a play. A play can be breathed life into more times, brought to life by different casts, but films don't have that kind of changeability. Look at any of the remade-ad-nauseam franchises. There's only so long they can hold up, and I think a niche cult classic like RHPS, which is already somewhat specific in time and culture, probably doesn't have even that much flexibility in this format.

I don't know. I just think most people feel like a new remake of a film is a different kettle of fish than a new run or adaptation of a play. There's more of a feel of permanency with the film, of potential mistakes being fossilised and examined forever more. The prospect causes a different sort of reaction.