[ SECRET POST #4698 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4698 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 44 secrets from Secret Submission Post #673.
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)]

Eh, I don’t actually think it’s unreasonable to judge an adaptation by how well it represents the original. A lot of people are only interested in it because it’s an adaptation of another text, and the makers know that; in fact it’s usually part of why the project gets green-lit in the first place (built-in audience = almost guaranteed money).

So if you’re only watching because you loved the original text, then it only makes sense that an adaptation which treats the original text like a pick-and-choose buffet isn’t going to impress you much. Like, thanks for claiming to represent the original text when actually you’re just riding the original so that you don’t have to create your own means of locomotion.

OTOH, I do think people should try harder to understand that not everyone is interested for the same reasons. Some people find the original text uninteresting, or extremely dated, or deeply flawed in some way. Some people don’t even like the original text at all. And in that case, those people are probably going to like the adaptation more if it plays extremely fast and loose with what it keeps from the original and what it tosses. And imo that’s an equally understandable and valid way of approaching an adaptation.

[(Anonymous)]

But no adaptation can actually be faithful - every adaptation involves changing some things, just by the nature of moving to a different medium.

And after all, if the adaptation is just a reflection of the glory of the original, what's the point of the adaptation at all?

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt, but have you never attempted to repeat an experience you really enjoyed? I bet you have, whether it's revisiting a specific place, eating a favorite comfort food, listening to your favorite songs...

It's not exactly the same experience every time, of course. But it can hit similar notes, and it's not at all surprising or unreasonable that people are into this. It's not "reflected glory" (frankly that's just silly), it's simply looking for more of what you like. That's the point.

[(Anonymous)]

This is a really good point. Even when something isn't exactly the same, it still has the potential to be more of that thing you like. And I can't blame fans for wanting that, or even for thinking they're going to get it. I mean, that's basically what an adaptation is claiming it's going to deliver.

[(Anonymous)]

Exactly.

[(Anonymous)]

every adaptation involves changing some things, just by the nature of moving to a different medium.

This is true, but a lot of adaptations don't even try.

if the adaptation is just a reflection of the glory of the original, what's the point of the adaptation at all?

Seeing the original in a different medium, for one. Definitely a big part of the appeal for some people. Or if it's a same-medium adaptation, then seeing the original looking shiny and seamless and non-dated. I mean, a friend of mine recently showed me that famous fan-made reshoot of the fight between Obi-Wan Kenobi and Darth Vader, and it was glorious. It changed very little about what actually happens in the scene, and yet the whole thing felt magnificently revamped and revitalized.

*shrugs*

I honestly like extremely loose adaptations for a lot of things. But I also understand why people who hate loose adaptations feel the way they do, and I think both sides' perspectives are valid.