[ SECRET POST #4936 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4936 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 50 secrets from Secret Submission Post #707.
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)]

Yes adaptions have to change some things. But adaptions are adaptions. They are adaptions of another person's work and that also requires a certain amount of faithfulness. Personally I believe that to be a good adaption requires a certain level of faithfulness or it is no longer a good adaption or sometimes even really an adaption at all (some things are really just In Name Only).

And some adaptions just miss the spirit of the thing they have adapted and don't understand it. And in my opinion that means they haven't done their job as an adaption.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. But I believe that an adaption has to do certain things to be a good adaption.

And I also find the idea of an adaption doing better justice to the story than the original questionable. That only happens in very, very rare instances for me and is more likely to happen in adaptions that are mostly faithful but then change one element that didn't work in the original. Like, for example, Clockwork Orange changes one major plotpoint and is better for it.

[type_wild]

I thiiiink we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I mean, there are instances of creators making significant contributions to the adaptations of their own work - will these changes, then, be "unfaithful" to their original visions, or will they count as the kind of revision that is an inescapable part of almost all creating?

From another angle: Are Disney's re-telling of fairytales failures becaues they completely alter the messages inherent in the original? (can folklore even have a "spirit" in the first place?) In light of how they dominate the versions of stories that people know, I certainly take issue with the things they did to The Hunchback of Notre Dame. I still think it's a stellar film.

[meadowphoenix]

I don't really consider fairytales, myths, and legends (or symbolic history) to be in the same category as other types of stories when it comes to adaptation. The history of alteration is as much a part of those types of stories as the plot points. That said I do think folklore has a spirit.

I think a good example of the bad adaptation, good movie is The Shining. The film alters something core to the book, but the movie is incredibly compelling.