Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2009-04-17 05:36 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2009-04-17 05:36 pm
[ SECRET POST #833 ]
⌈ Secret Post #833 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
101.
[John C. Reilly and Will Ferrell]
__________________________________________________
102.
[Cirque de Soleil: Kooza]
__________________________________________________
103.
[Sidney Crosby]
__________________________________________________
104.
[Watchmen]
__________________________________________________
105.
__________________________________________________
106.
__________________________________________________
107.
[M*A*S*H]
__________________________________________________
108.
[timothy geithner]
__________________________________________________
109.
[Rifftrax - iRiffs - Ice on Mars]
__________________________________________________
110.
__________________________________________________
111.
__________________________________________________
112.
__________________________________________________
113.
__________________________________________________
114.
[Bleach]
__________________________________________________
115.
__________________________________________________
116.
__________________________________________________
117.
__________________________________________________
118.
__________________________________________________
119.
__________________________________________________
120.
[Avatar]
__________________________________________________
121.
[Harry Potter]
__________________________________________________
122.
[Jackie Earle Haley]
__________________________________________________
123.
[30 Rock]
__________________________________________________
124.
[A Song of Ice and Fire]
__________________________________________________
125.
[Albert]
__________________________________________________
126.
__________________________________________________
127.
[Supernatural]
__________________________________________________
128.
[Watchmen]
__________________________________________________
129.
[Family Guy]
__________________________________________________
130.
[Fringe]
__________________________________________________
131.
[Boys Before Flowers]
__________________________________________________
132.
[American Idol]
__________________________________________________
133.
[Law & Order: UK, and Doctor Who]
__________________________________________________
134.
(Prison Break, Psych)
__________________________________________________
135.
[Life]
__________________________________________________
136.
[Phil & Lem, Better Off Ted]
__________________________________________________
137.
__________________________________________________
138.
__________________________________________________
139.
[Hamtaro]
__________________________________________________
140.
__________________________________________________
141.
[Gamers II]
__________________________________________________
142.
__________________________________________________
143.
[Kings]
__________________________________________________
144.
__________________________________________________
145.
__________________________________________________
146.
__________________________________________________
147.
__________________________________________________
148.
__________________________________________________
149.
__________________________________________________
150.
__________________________________________________
151.
[Urinetown: The Musical]
__________________________________________________
152.
[Ugly Betty]
__________________________________________________
153.
__________________________________________________
154.
__________________________________________________
155.
__________________________________________________
156.
[Joel Hodgson from MST3K]
__________________________________________________
157.
[Guys & Dolls Revival]
__________________________________________________
158.
[Stormhawks]
__________________________________________________
159.
[Nightwish]
__________________________________________________
160.
__________________________________________________
161.
[Gilmore Girls]
__________________________________________________
162.
__________________________________________________
163.
__________________________________________________
164.
[Raquel Reed]
__________________________________________________
165.
__________________________________________________
166.
__________________________________________________
167.
[FF7]
__________________________________________________
168.
[Verbotene Liebe]
__________________________________________________
169.
[Wicked]
__________________________________________________
170.
[Stargate Atlantis]
__________________________________________________
171.
[Megan Hilty/Kayla Collins/Girls Next Door]
__________________________________________________
172.
[Artemis Fowl]
__________________________________________________
173.
[Ghost Hunters, Torchwood]
__________________________________________________
174.
__________________________________________________
175.
__________________________________________________
176.
[The World Ends With You]
__________________________________________________
177.
[The Real Ghostbusters]
__________________________________________________
178.
[Being Erica]
__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #119.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
no subject
I hear this said a lot, and I still feel it's not a basic truth but rather the constant defense of lazy critics. Yes, the movie needs to have a hook for the masses, to at least appeal to them as something cool and engaging. But a hook should suffice. When the source material's so huge, and your aim is to make a faithful adaptation, you'd only end up making something insultingly simplistic and boring if you explained everything on screen. The movie's better and more ambitious when it assumes that the viewers are, if not familiar with the source material, then at least perceptive enough to follow along despite their unfamiliarity, and inform themselves later.
I've not actually seen anyone get harassed for not having read the book, but if people do judge out of ignorance, I can see why they might be.
no subject
The movie's better and more ambitious when it assumes that the viewers are, if not familiar with the source material, then at least perceptive enough to follow along despite their unfamiliarity, and inform themselves later.
More ambitious, sure, but a worse movie. I'd say the supplementary Watchmen DVD is more what you're describing--it works to complement both the comic and the movie, and probably doesn't work too well on its own, but that's fine for what it is.
I've not actually seen anyone get harassed for not having read the book, but if people do judge out of ignorance, I can see why they might be.
I've seen this in the comments of pretty much ever anti-Watchmen secret. And don't get me wrong, some of the criticisms are pretty moronic, but it's unfair to judge people for having an opinion on a supposedly stand-alone movie.
no subject
Contradiction in terms IMO. Why would it catch anyone's interest if it wasn't, if not enjoyable, then at least compelling? It ought to be enjoyable for non-fans, and more enjoyable for fans. Replace "enjoyable" with "compelling" as necessary.
The last adaptation I saw, where I was totally unfamiliar with the canon, was incredibly enjoyable even when I didn't quite understand what was going on. I went and read the book and loved it. The not knowing was intriguing, just as I think the hints of backstory and an alternate history in the Watchmen movie are intriguing.
Not understanding a movie is almost always extremely poor grounds for not liking it, unless you are specifically arguing that the story was poorly told. And it's often the case that people will try to argue that a story's been poorly told because they didn't have a clue what was going on half the time, until they read the story and find that it was adapted quite well.
no subject
Sorry, poorly worded on my part--I was trying to say that if it's only comprehensible/complete if you've read the book, then it's not a good movie. It could still be enjoyable, but that's still bad storytelling and bad moviemaking.
Not understanding a movie is almost always extremely poor grounds for not liking it, unless you are specifically arguing that the story was poorly told.
That's what I meant; if the only people who understand the movie are the ones who read the book, the movie has a problem.
And it's often the case that people will try to argue that a story's been poorly told because they didn't have a clue what was going on half the time, until they read the story and find that it was adapted quite well.
And isn't this a contradiction in terms? It's simply not a good adaptation if you can only understand what's going on if you've read the book, because adaptations are meant to stand on their own. If people tend not to understand it because it's complicated and needs a couple viewings or something, fine. If people tend not to understand it because they haven't read the supplementary material, then the movie is poorly done. (And I'll note that I'm arguing in the abstract here, as I've been a fan of the comic and really enjoyed the movie.)
no subject
I think we're only arguing an issue of degrees here. If the movie makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to the point where its scenes aren't even strung together in a slightly coherent way, sure, that's bad. But if you can follow the basic plot and fill in the blanks later, that's enough.
If there are points in the movie where you know you're seeing something important but you don't have quite enough info to parse it right away, all I'm saying is you should suck it up and get that info later, if you care enough to say you did or didn't like it.
I don't think it's a contradiction in terms because a movie may have been adapted well considering the limitations of the movie format, and still somewhat opaque to newcomers. A haiku obviously has to be more dense than an epic poem; it's not a bad haiku if it relies heavily on allusion.
no subject
If there are points in the movie where you know you're seeing something important but you don't have quite enough info to parse it right away, all I'm saying is you should suck it up and get that info later, if you care enough to say you did or didn't like it.
is really a matter of opinion. I think that it's cool if you want to do that, but that it shouldn't be required; my issue is with declaring others' opinions invalid because they didn't do this. "The movie doesn't work if you don't read the book" is a perfectly valid criticism; whether it matters to you is up to you. I would've seen Watchmen even if it was incomprehensible to anyone who didn't read the book, because of how it enhances my enjoyment of the source material, but tons of people wouldn't have liked it in that case, and I wouldn't blame them.
In short, my problem comes down to expecting everyone to do what you do; hell, I love reading the source material of an adaptation that interests me. But it isn't a requirement, and to treat it as such makes people less likely to see the movie and possibly get interested in the source material.
it's not a bad haiku if it relies heavily on allusion
A haiku also isn't meant to tell a complete story, while a movie is.