case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2025-01-02 05:12 pm

[ SECRET POST #6572 ]


⌈ Secret Post #6572 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 06 secrets from Secret Submission Post #939.
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.

Re: Original works you read/saw *after* seeing an adaptation

(Anonymous) 2025-01-03 03:20 am (UTC)(link)
Les Miserables, after seeing the movie and the play, and it made the book easier to follow. I could enjoy all the tangents without worrying that the story was going to be completely forgotten in favor of detailed period explanations of industrial glassblowing techniques. XD; And no, it didn't make me hate the adaptations, although there were some really powerful scenes in the book that always get cut.

Krabat, after coming across the film version and then reading comments about the movie where people pointed out that the movie is very scaled-down in comparison to the book. And kind of sensationalized. In that case, I don't regret it either, though, because getting a copy of the book in my country took quite a bit of initiative on my part, and I probably wouldn't have been motivated enough to seek it out, otherwise. I wouldn't have known how much I wanted to read it.

The Jungle Books (1 & 2), after Disney's animated version of the first one. Hm, in that case, my opinion of the movie went down considerably, even though I liked their version of Shere Khan and Kaa quite a lot, because the book was just so much richer and more complicated. And some of the drama in the second jungle book was phenomenal: the war Mowgli orchestrates on behalf of the wolves against the red dogs and the way Kaa helps him enlist the unwitting aid of the great bee colonies. Utterly bewitching. I don't understand why there haven't been more (serious) adaptations of the second Jungle Book.

I owe the original miniseries version of Shogun for my ever reading Clavell's book, too. Both were boundary-pushing in different mediums, and because I didn't have a lot of background in historical Japanese fiction, watching the show and reading the book almost felt like different experiences: the book added a LOT of cultural background, but the tv version had beautiful sets and outstanding acting.

On the other hand, I tried to read Pippi Longstocking after seeing some of the 1969 tv series with Inger Nilsson, and it seemed kind of limited, zany, and aimed-at-younger-children, in comparison? I had to read it in translation, though, so it may have been censored or tampered with. I just remember the live action version as having serious parts and real danger, (though obviously a girl who could pick up and launch a full-sized airplane with her bare hands couldn't help but be fantasy) and was let down by how random and harmless her adventures seemed in the books - when I finally came across the books.